SEND Provision: South-east England

Steve Darling Excerpts

Tuesday 15th July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) on securing this debate. Although Torbay is not in the south-east, I am sure that a lot of our SEND issues are reflected there.

A recent Ofsted report on our SEND provision identified widespread failings for children with SEND and disabilities. Although a lot of colleagues have highlighted challenges with local authorities, we must also reflect that the health service needs to play its part in driving the positive change that we need for our young people. Only yesterday, health bosses failed to turn up and play their part at a continuous improvement meeting for youngsters in Torbay, even though that Ofsted report was under discussion. I would like to know how the Minister is holding the health system to account on this issue, not just local authorities and education departments.

As an example, I am aware of one failing in Torbay where a decision should have been made by the end of March for a youngster on where their next year’s placement would start in September. They were only told the day before they started their GCSEs that their placement was going to be changed, which, un-shockingly, sent them into a meltdown, and they underperformed massively.

I would particularly like to hear the Minister’s reflections on a couple of areas. One is the safety valve system. That is very much financially driven, but what investigations has the Minister made into how that system may have driven any improvement of the outcomes of SEND pupils, or not? What are the Minister’s reflections on the future of the safety valve system, because it has some real challenges?

I would also welcome the Minister’s reflections on the ladder system that is applied in Torbay, in which the level of intervention with a child is increased quietly, bit by bit, from mainstream education to a high level of intervention, and so on, until the right level is found. But to achieve that level, the youngster has to have failed repeatedly in school. That reinforces trauma both for the youngster and the family involved, through failure after failure. Surely that ladder system cannot be appropriate for the youngsters or their families. It seems a very wicked way, rather than sending those youngsters directly into the appropriate places.

I will give a couple of examples from my constituency. Rachel has to home tutor her youngster because provision was withdrawn. Shaan had to give up work because there was inadequate provision for her youngster. A non-verbal autistic youngster had two really good offers for education, but neither was accepted by the local authority. I look forward to the Minister’s reflections because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells identified, these are some of the most vulnerable youngsters in our communities, and they deserve better.

--- Later in debate ---

[Catherine McKinnell]

Yes, we absolutely recognise that the current system is really difficult for parents, carers and young people to navigate, and it is not delivering the outcomes we want to see. While we will set out the longer-term approach to reform in the schools White Paper in the autumn, we are clear that the changes we make must improve support for families, stop parents from having to fight for that support and education, and protect the effective provision already in place. We have given that reassurance. We know that sustainable reform will take some time, but we have already begun the work to ensure that children and young people are getting the support they need.

We have introduced the regional improvements for standards and excellence advisers to work with mainstream schools, where we know outcomes need to be better. We want to ensure that all pupils in those schools can achieve and thrive, whatever their background, so we are targeting the support where that challenge is currently greatest. I recently had the opportunity to see that in action in Kent, when I visited Astor secondary school in Dover with Sir Kevan Collins. We met school and trust leaders, as well as the RISE adviser and the supporting organisation, Mulberry Schools Trust. We listened intently to the school’s experience of the programme so far. It is early days, but looking incredibly positive and it was good to see that support being put in place for schools that have been struggling for far too long.

We are also building a robust evidence base on what works to drive inclusive education, including through the creation of the expert advisory group for inclusion, led by Tom Rees. We are extending the partnerships for inclusion of neurodiversity in schools—the PINS programme—to a further cohort of around 1,200 additional mainstream primary schools, to build that teacher and staff capacity to identify and better meet the needs of neurodivergent children in mainstream primary schools. The programme is supported by the Department for Education and the Department for Health, because we absolutely recognise the challenges outlined by a number of hon. Members, including my hon. Friends the Members for Worthing West (Dr Cooper) and for Rochester and Strood (Lauren Edwards), about making sure that we work together with the Department for Health where that is needed.

[Steve Darling]

Will the Minister give way?

[Catherine McKinnell]

I will, but I am conscious of time and want to respond to all the issues raised.

[Steve Darling]

Can the Minister provide reassurance on how she is holding health services to account? They can be part of the solution, if they play their part.

[Catherine McKinnell]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. What we want is a system in which local partners work in partnership. Currently, that is inspected by Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission. I will come to the particular examples in Kent and the south-east that hon. Members have raised.

We want to support and challenge local authorities and health authorities to ensure that partnership is real, working and—most of all—delivering outcomes for children. Everything we do is focused on improving those outcomes, which is why we are prioritising early intervention and inclusive provision. We know that early intervention prevents unmet need from escalating. It supports children to achieve their goals alongside their peers, and we have a clear target for more children to meet their early development goals. We are absolutely laser-focused on improving those outcomes for children.

On accountability and inspection, Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission jointly inspected the local SEND provision. I read with great concern the inspection reports for Oxfordshire and Bracknell Forest, both of which have been inspected under the new Ofsted-CQC framework. They identified significant concerns about the experiences and outcomes for children with SEND in the local areas. The issues that have been raised are incredibly serious, and DfE officials and NHS England advisers are meeting regularly with leaders and representatives from schools, colleges and parent-carer forums to continue to review and challenge the progress against the improvement plans.

The Department has also appointed SEND advisers to provide advice and challenge to local leaders. That is happening is Bracknell Forest, Kent, Surrey, Slough, Oxfordshire, West Sussex, Medway, Milton Keynes, and the Isle of Wight. There are also additional packages of support to provide training and advice in those local areas. It is vital that rapid action is taken to improve SEND services where weaknesses are identified, and that leaders accept collective responsibility and accountability for delivering on these improvements. There is a relentless focus on driving improvement, supporting where we can and where necessary, but also ensuring that good practice, where it emerges, is spread. That is what we want to focus on with our reforms.

The number of education, health and care plans has increased each year since they were introduced in 2014. As of January 2025, there were over 630,000 children and young people with an EHCP—an increase of 10% in the last year alone. As a result of flaws and lack of capacity in the system to meet lower-level need, additional strain has been placed on specialist services, which has had a detrimental impact on families’ experiences of accessing support and contributed to creating an unsustainable system.

Many parents feel that the only way they can get any support for their child is by going through the EHCP process. However, independently published insights show that extensive improvements to the system, using early intervention along with better resourcing of mainstream schools, could create much better outcomes for children. I know that is what many constituents want to see, including those of my hon. Friends the Members for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) and for East Thanet (Ms Billington).

The insights show that more children and young people could have their needs met in a mainstream setting, rather than a specialist placement. That would ensure that they could go to school locally and help to tackle some of the incredible transport challenges and costs, as well as the time that young people spend travelling around. They should be able to go to their local school. We also know that it takes a vast workforce, from teachers to teaching assistants, early years educators and health professionals, to help children thrive. We are investing of each one of these to improve outcomes and experiences across the country.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven (Chris Ward) said, high-quality teaching is central to ensuring that pupils with SEND are given the best possible opportunities to achieve. That is why we are implementing a coherent offer of high-quality teacher development for all teachers. It begins with their initial teaching training and goes into their early career teaching support, so that all teachers have the right skills and support to enable them to support students with special educational needs. It will enable teachers to identify those needs and to signpost if needed, as well as to adapt their teaching according to different learning abilities.

Dedicated Schools Grant

Steve Darling Excerpts

Tuesday 6th May 2025 Westminster Hall

[Cameron Thomas]

I wholeheartedly agree, and will come to that point shortly. I hope my hon. Friend will pass on my empathy to her headteacher.

Our teachers are no longer simply expected to educate our children according to the curriculum. Governments and society continue to expect more and more of our already overburdened teachers. Increasingly, four-year-olds are being introduced to school non-verbal, unable to use cutlery, and sometimes wearing nappies—but those are just the headlines. Discipline, time management, self and social awareness, self and mutual respect, moral courage, honesty, work ethic, public service and charity are soft skills and attributes that should be introduced in the home and honed within society as well as at school. This Government, with honest intentions towards our children’s healthcare, now have teachers cleaning their pupils’ teeth—just one additional straw upon the camel’s back. It is no wonder that teaching assistant posts are vacated or lie empty when people can earn more working in the local supermarket.

I understand that fixing the education system will be complex and expensive, and that action must also take place beyond the scope of the Department for Education, but something that can be addressed now is a more equitable allocation of funding. This would go a long way to remedying the situation for many schools in Gloucestershire and elsewhere. The dedicated schools grant is the mechanism through which the Department funds local authorities, which in turn allocate their resources to the schools within their jurisdiction.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

One school in my constituency has a £100,000 bill due to the national insurance hike, which is resulting in redundancies. Does my hon. Friend agree that the national insurance hike is exacerbating the inequity that many schools face in our local communities?

[Cameron Thomas]

I entirely agree. I have long spoken out against the short-sightedness of the national insurance hike, and I will come back to the short-termism that I think it important this Government escape.

The dedicated schools grant is allocated according to the national funding formula, which is outdated and puts schools such as mine in Gloucestershire under increased pressure. Mainstream schools in the lowest-funded local authority receive £5,000 less per pupil per year than they do in the highest-funded authority.

Adoption Breakdown

Steve Darling Excerpts

Thursday 3rd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

I am pleased to have secured this debate on this important issue, which is rarely discussed, yet profoundly impacts thousands of families across the UK: the crisis of adopted children leaving the family home prematurely. I want to highlight this issue of adoption breakdown, which sometimes might be days, months or even years after an adoption order is signed. Adoption is not just a legal process, but a lifelong commitment that demands sustained support from Government. At present, that support is simply not in place.

After meeting a family in my constituency who had experienced an adoption breakdown, I was deeply alarmed by the lack of support available once an adoption order is signed. Since securing this debate, I have been inundated by messages from people and families across the country sharing their lived experience. The overwhelming consensus is clear: adoptive parents feel isolated and forced to navigate the challenges of raising children with trauma and complex needs without sufficient support, often resulting in adoption breakdown.

The reality is that many adoptions face profound challenges. The trauma, loss, and attachment difficulties experienced by adopted children do not simply vanish once an adoption order is granted. Those challenges persist, often surfacing as complex behavioural, emotional and psychological difficulties that demand long-term specialist support. According to Adoption UK, 70% of adoptive families report that their children have significant social, emotional and mental health needs. Many are diagnosed with conditions such as foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder, yet post-adoption support remains inconsistent and inadequate, forcing families into exhausting battles just to access the help they desperately need.

For many adoptive parents, raising children who have suffered early life trauma is an immense challenge. Many endure physical aggression, verbal abuse and school exclusions. They feel abandoned, left without a clear pathway to support, and when crises emerge, the system often responds too late, if at all.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

The issues that my hon. Friend raises are spot on. Would he agree that the more trauma-informed training we have within schools, the better these young people will be able to be accepted and supported within schools, rather than potentially demonised?

[Tom Gordon]

I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention, and I will come on to that important point later in my speech. A major challenge in tackling adoption breakdown is the lack of reliable data. We have little understanding of the true scale of the problem, making it hard to assess the effectiveness of current policies or plan for meaningful improvements. Local authorities, which are meant to provide support, frequently fail to help parents facing those significant challenges in raising children with complex needs, and that is worsened by the absence of clear, specific policies to prevent or respond to adoption breakdowns. There is an urgent need for better data.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Janet Daby)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Tom Gordon) on securing this important debate. I have indeed listened and heard his many concerns, issues and questions. There have been a great number of interventions from many hon. Members across the Chamber, and I will endeavour to respond to those, too.

The stories that the hon. Gentleman mentioned are heartbreaking. On the back of that, I would also like to say that there are many, many positive stories of adopted children and their successes, where things have gone incredibly well. I just want to give a bit of a balance. I know that when an adoptive parent adopts a child, they want to do their very best for them—to bring them into their family, love them, show them security and help them to thrive, grow and develop in every way possible. I know that people across this Chamber share that view, and that we all want the very best for adopted children and adoptive parents.

Supporting adoptive families and preventing adoption breakdown is a priority that I know all Members across the House support. As the Minister for Children, it is a significant priority for me, too, so I am pleased to be able to respond to this debate. Supporting children through adoption is a manifesto commitment for this Government. Every child deserves and needs a loving and stable family home, which is exactly what adoption can, should and must provide. Improving support for adopted families is a key part of our plan for change, to ensure that every child has the opportunity to succeed.

We inherited a system in which far too many families are missing out on vital post-adoption support services. We recognise that we need to improve our knowledge of adoption breakdown and are taking action to improve the statistics, the data we collect and other forms of research. The number of children who return to the care system who have an adoption order has remained between 170 and 180 in each of the past five years. However, these figures are not as robust as we would like them to be, and we will be challenging local authorities to improve the accuracy of their returns.

In particular, we need social workers always to record when a child entering care is living under an adoption order. We do not collect specific information on adoption breakdowns where the child does not return to care. Some adopted young people will go to live with birth relatives, and others to live independently at the age of 16 or 17 without the knowledge of the local authority. Sometimes this is for short periods, and sometimes they return home.

We know from previous research that around 3% of adoptions disrupt, but this research is 10 years old. To gain more up-to-date information, the Government have been funding the new research “Family Roots”—I am sure Members will be very interested to know more about that—which is looking at adopted children’s outcomes. This will give us new, up-to-date information on adoption disruption and breakdown, and the results will be published later in the year.

High-quality support for adopted children is critical. It can decrease the likelihood of adoption disruptions or breakdowns. Research shows that approximately one third of families are doing well, one third need extra support compared with other families, and one third report that they are in crisis.

Adoptive families often complain that they do not get the support they need when they are in crisis. They often experience blame and criticism of their parental approach and there is a lack of understanding about the impact of trauma on their children’s behaviour. I have asked regional adoption agencies to put in place services this year that can respond quickly and effectively to adoptive families in crisis, including trauma-trained professionals who provide evidence-based support.

We are also ensuring that all social workers work better to understand the long-term impact of trauma. We recently published new post-qualifying standards for social workers, in which we say that all social workers should be trained “to use evidence and best practice to reduce the impact of any trauma, increase the likelihood of secure relationships and ensure improved outcomes for the future.”

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I wonder whether the Minister has heard of the outstanding charity Home for Good, which uses faith-based groups to support families through either fostering or adoption. Does the Minister believe that there are opportunities to give them extra support, so that we can grow a richer tapestry of support for those who adopt or foster?

[Janet Daby]

Yes, I know Home for Good; I have met the people involved and they do excellent work on fostering and adoption. There is so much more that could be done, so I absolutely take on board what the hon. Member has mentioned.

Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund

Steve Darling Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Janet Daby]

We are always keenly working across Departments and within our Department with the Treasury to ensure that we can have enough funds to do the things that we would like to do in government.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) on obtaining the urgent question and dragging this information from the Minister, whether kicking and screaming or not. First, I thank Tim and Rachel and Matt and Kelly from my constituency: two families who have adopted youngsters and benefited from the fund. I was adopted some 55 years ago, but the world is now a much more complex place, so children are much more likely to have had adverse childhood experiences and therefore need this funding.

One had hoped that, following the general election, the adults were back in the room. Will the Minister assure the House that the funding will continue year after year?

[Janet Daby]

I thank the hon. Member for his question and pay tribute to his constituents. This Government have no plans at this time to prevent the funding from continuing. As I have said, under the Adoption and Children Act 2002, local authorities have a statutory duty to have support services in place for adopted children.

Primary School Breakfast Clubs

Steve Darling Excerpts

Monday 18th November 2024 Commons Chamber

[Mr Dhesi]

It is wonderful to see some of the work happening within my hon. Friend’s constituency. That is another aspect of this debate, because normally his constituency would be associated with being more affluent, but among all of our constituencies there are pockets of serious social deprivation and children going without the meals that are required. I am sure that the Minister will have heard his views and I am hopeful that in due course that is something that the Government may well be able to implement.

Free breakfast clubs are about fighting not only poverty, but obesity. In Slough, shockingly, 26% of children aged 11 to 12 are obese. We also see a higher-than-average prevalence of cardiovascular diseases.

[Steve Darling (Torbay) (LD)]

“Tired, hungry and cold.” That is how one headteacher told me a number of her pupils came to school feeling, when I visited a primary school in Torbay last week. I was impressed with how her team was supporting those youngsters, both emotionally and with material support, whether for hunger or for feeling cold. It was very sad that one of the pupils was showing a blanket to others because it was keeping them warm. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the more opportunities we give for youngsters in our schools to get warm meals, the more we can drive positive change for our communities?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. I can tell from the number of contributions that this debate is important to many colleagues. However, Members should be here at the beginning of the debate if they wish to make interventions.