Tuesday 23 November 2021

Notes from 11KBW Webinar about the Portsmouth JR

These are my notes from the webinar hosted by Paul Greatorex (who stood for PCC) and James Cornwell (who stood for the Secretary of State).

As these are notes, they are written in note form.

The presentation was split into four sections:

  1. The Law
  2. The Case
  3. The Implications
  4. Q&A session
1. The Law

1996 Education Act: s7, s9, s13, s436 and s437.
2002 Ed Act: s175

Case Law: 
Talmud Torah 1985 - definition of "suitable" education is if it equips a child for life in their community.
Tandy 1998 - suitability is determined by education not resources
Tweedy and Pritchard 1963 - if the LA doesn't see a child, it may trigger NTS
Phillips vs Brown 1980 - LA allowed to ask for information.  If no information is given, LA may trigger NTS.

Children Missing Education Documents
EHEDGLA 2019
EHEDGP 2019

2. The Case

Portsmouth changed their policy, blaming it on the 2019 guidance, to say that a report alone is unlikely to be sufficient.
The Claimant's reports were very detailed, but PCC didn't believe them.
PCC wanted to know the reading and writing levels of the children.

The case was NO challenge to LA's assessment of suitability.
The case was NO challenged based on the change of policy from previous years.

[my paraphrase] After providing work samples for 4 or 5 years in a row, then the LA may simply accept a report.
[My comment] ie samples of work must be provided in most cases.

All LAs are acting lawfully if they ask for more than just a report.

3. Implications

There's nothing wrong with LAs requesting evidence as part of the initial informal request.

LAs can ask for corroborative evidence, eg work samples or to meet the child.

4. Q&As

Dismisses the suggestion that work is the IP of the child.
SEN - doesn't prevent HE.
Different educational philosophies should be no problem, but they recommend a timetable etc

You are NOT in breach of s7 if you knowingly send your child to a school that is in special measures.  Apparently the age/ability/aptitude bit only applies if you do not send your child to school, not if you do.

LAs are not legally entitled to endter the home nor see the child.

If an LA writes unlawful policy, the first set is to complain through the LA's complaints process, then next step would be to take it to JR.

They didn't answer my question about section 6.12 of EHEDGLA which states "Of course, the local authority should give reasonable weight to information provided by parents, on its own merits. For example, an authority should not dismiss information provided by parents simply because it is not in a particular form preferred by the authority".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When I have more time, I might come back to this to link to the relevant docs etc.

No comments:

Post a Comment