SEND Provision: Kent

Sojan Joseph Excerpts

Wednesday 12th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Sojan Joseph (Ashford) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I am regularly contacted by parents or guardians of children to express their concerns about the provision of SEND education in our area, so I am grateful to my constituency neighbour, my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan), for securing this important debate, and I congratulate him on his excellent speech.

At the end of the summer and the start of the autumn, I organised a series of meetings for constituents with direct experience of the SEND system in Kent. I am grateful to the primary and secondary school headteachers and staff, as well as the representatives of local charity Differences Not Disabilities, who gave up their time to meet me. I especially thank the parents and carers who spoke so powerfully about the difficulties they have faced and, in many cases, continue to face with Kent county council in securing a suitable education for their children. I also appreciate the constructive and thoughtful way in which all attendees approached our discussions.

As the Government look to bring forward their proposals for reform of the SEND system across England, my constituents urge Ministers to ensure that abrupt change is not made to those areas that are working well. Otherwise, there is a risk that the successful parts of the system could be lost. My constituents would also like reassurances regarding education, health and care plans. They do not want to see them scrapped and would like to see a personalised plan like EHCPs remain in the reformed system.

There was strong feeling among my constituents about the need to strengthen early support for children and families and ensure that early intervention is not a one-off, but consistent. The headteachers and parents at my meetings were firmly of the view that when it comes to early intervention, a “little and often” approach will bring far greater benefits than waiting until a child falls behind or ends up needing specialist provision later on.

My constituents want to see a national training programme introduced for EHCPs. If they were well written from the start, there would be no need for the constant reviews that currently take place. We also heard that in Kent, delays in the issuing of EHCPs are the norm, with too many being issued well beyond the statutory deadlines. My constituents were clear that when EHCPs are eventually issued, they are not well written, and key provisions are being left out—often those that involve money.

There was also strong feeling among my constituents that the Reform administration at Kent county council does not properly take into account the views of parents when writing or amending EHCPs, nor give them the full information they are entitled to. That is also reflected when I make representations to the council on behalf of my constituents about the education of their children. I have to wait too long for responses and, when they do come through, often they are inadequate and cannot help my constituents.

In one case, I wrote to the council in February and again in March on behalf of a constituent regarding their daughter. The family had moved to Kent in December, and the daughter, who has an EHCP, was not in school at that time. Although I received an acknowledgment from the council in March, I did not receive a full response until last month—some seven months after first writing to the council. My constituent’s daughter only secured a placement at a special school at the start of the new academic year in September.

In another example, I wrote to the council in mid-July on behalf of a constituent who had expressed concern to me that her child was not in school. The council acknowledged my letter in August, but four months later, I am still waiting for a full response. The final example also dates from July, when I wrote to the council on behalf of a constituent to ask whether it intended to comply with a court order against it. I have recently received a reply asking if I could provide assistance by arranging and facilitating an effective and meaningful method of alternative dispute resolution.

As with most issues, funding for SEND and how it is allocated is critical. I warmly welcome that, thanks to the Labour Government, Kent county council has received an increase of £15 million in funding for SEND provision. It is important that my constituents now start to see the difference from this increase in resources. In our discussions, my constituents expressed a strong belief that SEND funding for mainstream schools must be ringfenced. If money is allocated for a child’s support, it must be spent on that child’s needs, and not diverted elsewhere.

Parents and teachers were clear that, instead of relying on new independent schools being built, Kent county council should be assisting local state schools in our area to adapt their facilities. With the right investment, my constituents expressed the hope that we could see more specialist hubs created in existing schools across Ashford, Hawkinge and the villages. Too many children at the moment have to travel long distances to receive their education. More specialist hubs in existing schools would allow more children to be educated closer to where they live.

It was clear from my discussions that we also need to reform the tribunal system. I have evidence from casework of how adversarial it has become, with solicitors and representatives on both sides—that message came across loud and clear in my meetings about SEND provision. Parents told me how most cases now end up at tribunal, and the majority find in favour of the child. The high number of cases that end up in tribunal and the fact that so many are successful are a clear indication of parents’ dissatisfaction with how the system is operating in Kent and that it is not working properly. The headteachers I have met believe that effective reform of the way that tribunals work would mean that the money that is currently spent on unnecessarily taking some cases to tribunal could instead be allocated to state schools.

I have written to the Secretary of State in more detail on some of the wider points that might be helpful as the Government bring forward their proposals, but I look forward to the Minister’s response to what Members and I have said in this debate about the situation in Kent.