Children with SEND: Assessments and Support

Ben Coleman Excerpts

Monday 15th September 2025 Westminster Hall

[Ben Coleman (Chelsea and Fulham) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Allin-Khan. In my constituency, 158 families signed the petition. We have heard that too many disabled children, not just in my constituency of Chelsea and Fulham, but across the country, are being let down. Parents feel that they must fight every step of the way just to get the help that their children are entitled to.

One problem is that under current law, schools are only required to use their “best endeavours” to support children with special educational needs. That is quite a vague obligation. Some schools—including in my constituency—step up magnificently, but others, under financial pressure, reduce or remove support and nothing holds them to account.

The results are stark. A recent survey found that 60% of disabled children who do not have an education, health and care plan are avoiding school due to the lack of support. Because of this broken system, families are often cruelly forced into—as we have heard—lengthy and difficult procedures to get EHCPs, even though their children’s needs could have been met earlier through proper support in mainstream schools if it existed. As we have heard, that is driving up costs, with councils having to pay for expensive private placements to the extent that some are in significant distress.

I welcome the Government’s confirmation that the legal right to assessment support is going to be retained, but we need stronger, clearer protections for disabled children’s education. That is why I support a proposal from the charities Contact and IPSEA to amend section 66 of the Children and Families Act 2014. Let us replace the vague phrase “best endeavours” with clear statutory duties, so that schools are legally required to identify a child’s needs, put a plan in writing, and either deliver that support or refer the case to the local authority. If funding accompanies those new rights, we will reduce the cost of EHCPs, because people will not want to get them as much, and we will reduce the cost of tribunals and costly private provision.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Ben Coleman]

I am afraid I am running out of time—ah yes, I will happily give way.

[Josh Babarinde]

The hon. Gentleman can thank me for intervening. He talks about costs and legal requirements, but does he agree that in many areas hedge-fund-backed independent specialist schools are taking cash from our starving system? There is no cap on their profits, they do not have to report on their attainment and they do not have the same level of transparency as maintained schools. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we need to get to grips with the unscrupulous hedge-fund-backed providers, to make sure that kids and families are not taken advantage of?

--- Later in debate ---

[Ben Coleman]

I am most grateful for that question, for many reasons. There is a huge problem with private equity hedge-funds going into private education, just as they have gone into care homes. That problem needs to be addressed, first, by making provision in the state sector much better than it is now. It should be as good as it can be so that people do not find they need an EHCP, because the SEND support is there anyway, and if they do get one, their needs can be met in the state sector and we do not have to go to the expensive private sector. That is why I hope that in the Budget the Treasury will see the need for funding proper SEND provision, because that will save money in the long term. The Treasury does not like the term “invest to save”, but I think it is a good one in this context.

We have a wonderful new Minister. I commend her for the time she has already spent listening to families and teachers. I hope she will now act, in co-production with families, to put SEND support on a solid legal footing, to ditch the Conservatives’ legacy of failure and to build an education system in which every child matters.

[Several hon. Members rose—]