Wednesday 16 September 2009

Is the law on home education going to change?


There seems to be real and genuine anxiety among some parents about proposed changes in the law which might allow children to be interviewed by local authority officers without the parents' presence. How likely is such a law to find its way onto the statute books? Well, not at all likely really. Let us look closely at the process.

Transforming a recommendation from a review conducted for some government department into a new law is quite a big step. The Badman report made a number of recommendations and there is no way of telling which parts of them will be chosen as the basis for new legislation. Often, the laws that emerge from such reviews are all but unrecognisable when compared with the original ideas that were suggested. The chance of one sentence taken from the twenty eight recommendations of the Badman Report eventually ending up as the law of England is slim. More probable by far is some bland and anodyne statement that local authorities should make every effort to establish that children are receiving a suitable education. However, let us assume a worst case scenario and take it for granted that this is the intention of the lawmakers, that they really want the right of LA officers to see children alone.

The next hurdle is that the government is rapidly running out of time. The next election will be held next June at the latest, so I would say offhand that there is only a fifty fifty chance of this being dealt with during the life of this parliament. If it does make it into law then we can say one thing with complete assurance; that it will be a hasty and poorly worded law. This is good, for reasons which I shall explain later. For now, let us again assume a worst case and that the law has been passed. What now?

It is important to realise that many laws are passed and then virtually ignored by everybody. Easter, for example, was fixed by an Act of Parliament in 1928 as being the Sunday after the second Saturday in April. It is legally not a moveable feast at all and has not been for over eighty years! You were probably not aware of this, because nobody took the least bit of notice of the law. More recent and relevant to us is the Caravan Sites Act 1968. This laid a statutory duty on all local authorities to provide campsites for Gypsies. Many councils simply ignored it and there has been no consequence at all for them. Central government often pass laws like this which require local authorities to do this or that. Many of these laws are disregarded. So even if the law is passed, there will be a good deal of discretion for local authorities as to how strictly it is enforced.

Let us pretend though that all this has happened. The law has been passed, it includes the right of local authority officers to interview children alone, everything is settled now, surely? No, this is where the fun begins! The first thing that will happen is that the law will be tested in the courts and the test here when a public authority is carrying out what it sees as its functions is not just whether the body is acting in accordance with its powers, but if it is being reasonable and proportionate. This means that even if the local authority is acting within the law, the courts can tell them to lay off on the grounds that their behaviour is unreasonable. I can't see it being five minutes before this ends up in a Judicial Review. In short, the courts will have to decide whether expecting to enter a home against the wishes of the parents and speak to a child alone is a reasonable requirement. They will make their decision in the light of precedent and also the test of what is reasonable and proportionate. I can't see such a clause surviving, even if it was in the new legislation. This would be made even more likely because this law, if it is passed, will be a typical rushed job, cobbled together and pushed through in haste. Such laws tend to be very easy for the courts to reject.


To summarise, there is a long way to go before anybody needs to get het up about all this. My personal view is that some new legislation would not come at all amiss. I realise that not everyone agrees with me on that point, to say the least of it. But it does not really matter, because the chances of local authorities actually ending up with specific powers about interviewing children alone are negligible.


16 comments:

  1. "Transforming a recommendation from a review conducted for some government department into a new law is quite a big step. The Badman report made a number of recommendations and there is no way of telling which parts of them will be chosen as the basis for new legislation. "

    Have you read the consultation document?

    "It is important to realise that many laws are passed and then virtually ignored by everybody."

    Do you think that the LA officials who currently insist on home visits will ignore a law that actually gives them this power? What about those who would like to insist on home visits but are a bit more conscientious about following existing laws? We have no reason to believe that this particular law would be ignored and plenty of evidence that it will be enthusiastically welcomed in some areas.

    "The first thing that will happen is that the law will be tested in the courts and the test here when a public authority is carrying out what it sees as its functions is not just whether the body is acting in accordance with its powers, but if it is being reasonable and proportionate."

    This assumes that parents will want to take the risk of being taken to court with all the trauma and stress it would cause their family. How many home educators have gone this far to date?

    "To summarise, there is a long way to go before anybody needs to get het up about all this. "

    Assuming that the changes will cause harm to families, are disproportionate and that the courts would recognise this and decide in favour of a home educating family if it ever reaches court, don't you think it would be better for families if the changes can be stopped before they happen? Why do you think we should allowing many families and children to suffer harm until someone has the nerve to force a LA into court? Why wouldn't we try to stop it before it happens? I can see no benefit in waiting to see what happens and then reacting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sharon-is so right and puts in words far better than we can but she hit the nail on the head Why wouldn't we try to stop it before it happens? I can see no benefit in waiting to see what happens and then reacting.and also Do you think that the LA officials who currently insist on home visits will ignore a law that actually gives them this power? What about those who would like to insist on home visits but are a bit more conscientious about following existing laws? We have no reason to believe that this particular law would be ignored and plenty of evidence that it will be enthusiastically welcomed in some areas HCC want forced visits Jack Cawthra does he the one wh oheads up the homme education derpartment in Hampshire.

    ReplyDelete
  3. you ask Jack Cawthra do you want forced home visit in law for home educated child and would you enforce them he would say yes please and hurry up and pass this law!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think that many LAs would not use the new powers which such a law would confer upon them. Some local authorities want them as a last resort, for some very difficult and recalcitrant parents. The reason that I think that we should calm down about all this is that there is a mood of near hysteria in some quarters, with talk of children being taken away for interrogation being common! I can't see how this is helping things at all.

    As I said, I would say that it might go either way on this. The longer the delay, the more chance that this will be shelved for a while. I don't think that the Tories would want to rush into passing a law like this, at least not for a couple of years into their first term. Ultimately though, I feel that it is coming, whether home educating parents want it or not. Of course people can protest against it and try and modify the provisions of any new law; that is what democracy is all about.

    ReplyDelete
  5. but quite a lot of LEA would want to use these new powers if there ever come in! that is why you have to take a tough line give an inch and some LEA like HCC will take a mile! Jack Cawthra would use these new powers he wants them. i not like to leave it to chance in the hopes it may not be used.its better to fight hard now than later!

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I think that many LAs would not use the new powers which such a law would confer upon them. Some local authorities want them as a last resort, for some very difficult and recalcitrant parents."

    I've had a quick scan through the LA FOI results for any information about visits and, although they were not specifically asked about visits, some information is available. About 20 currently routinely carry out home visits and some include parents who refuse in the figures they give for children not receiving a suitable education. Several others make the point that they would like to be able to visit but don't currently insist on it because they understand the current law. Judging from this I would think that at least 20% of LA will carry out annual visits if the planned legislative changes go ahead. I suspect this is a very conservative estimate too, because most of the FOI replies do not mention visits at all.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that it is quite possible that the new plans won't get as far as legislation because the govt will run out of time, but then again if it gets a move on with it (eg straight after the consultation finishes) it may go through without too much opposition, because it will be dressed up as a "child protection issue" - and few MP's will vote against that.
    If it gets through, it may not make much difference to many home educators who either comply fully to requests for visits anyway or who have LAs that won't bother with all families. It will make a difference to some - either because they have difficult LAs (or useless "inspectors" who have no idea about home education) or because they are like some who shall remain nameless who won't cooperate at all and will end up in court.
    Despite my fundamental objections to increasing any such legislative burdens on families, I cannot understand the willingness of some to literally "go to the stake" over such issues. I Have witnessed first hand the effect of refusing to cooperate on a family - resulting in huge damage to the family , child protection proceedings and a real possibility of them loosing custody of the child. However regretable compromise is as matter of principle, risking the welfare of my child on such matters seems ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Julie- i hope you dont mean us they are like some who shall remain nameless who won't cooperate at all and will end up in court.
    Evidence was sent in writing to Hampshire LEa but Jack Cawthra and david Kirk who refused to assess it and told a lie that Peter amy not have done this work Dr tony Ludlow was very unhappy with the way peter was treated! Dr tony ludlow is a supporter of HCC and state school but not over the way Peter was treated.
    We never meet with people who do not have the best interst of our child and appear to mistrust Parents like you do?
    not been to court so far six years and no court i wonder why? we up for it but it appears HCC are not why?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Julie- you go to the stake whe nyou know your right and are VERY unhappy over the way you been treated think about that say lies where told about your children by HCC LEA what would you do say dont worry about it its ok i dont mind nice LEA officer told a few lies it be ok?

    ReplyDelete
  10. "I cannot understand the willingness of some to literally "go to the stake" over such issues. I Have witnessed first hand the effect of refusing to cooperate on a family - resulting in huge damage to the family , child protection proceedings and a real possibility of them loosing custody of the child."

    Yes, I agree, and this is why I think we need to try as hard as possible to stop the changes going through. If the changes go through there will be false positive concerns for education and welfare which will cause harm to families in much the same way as a refusal to cooperate will. However families react to the changes, more will be harmed than under the current system and I still cannot see how any children will be helped.

    ReplyDelete
  11. MR Anon, I am talking about what "might" happen ie "if" the legislation gets passed and "if" the LA decides to enforce it..what would you do then if refused permission to home educate? Under present legislation it is relatively easy to get rid of an SAO (as you have found) but if the new recommendations are brought in, your position might be tricker?? (isn't that why you are trying to fight against Badman's proposals?)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Under the new regulations they will still have to issue a SAO, so I'm not sure how much will have changed once things reach that point. They have talked about defining a suitable education in more detail but I'm not sure if this is included in the first round of changes.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I can't see how they can define a 'suitable' education if there are schools such as summerhill passing their ofsted inspection.

    Surely, families will just group together and set up small schools with a similar ethos to summerhill in that activities are provided but it's up to the child to take them up -or not.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yes, if they do start defining suitable more closely, Summerhill may also suffer as a result. It's a shame there aren't more free schools in the UK. I'm not sure if a negative effect on a single school will necessarily be enough to prevent them making changes.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Julie said,
    "I think that it is quite possible that the new plans won't get as far as legislation because the govt will run out of time, but then again if it gets a move on with it (eg straight after the consultation finishes) "

    It doesn't look likely that the consultation will slow anything down as the planned legislation is already timetabled to be included in the legislative programme for 2009/10. They intend to include improvements in monitoring arrangements for children educated at home in the Improving schools and safeguarding children Bill. It's ironic that they plan to include 'a new set of guarantees to an individually tailored education for each child and their parents' in the same legislation.

    http://www.commonsleader.gov.uk/output/page2831.asp

    ReplyDelete
  16. Julie- no our postion will not be any tricker just carry on home educating as we have been since June 23 2003 i have a very crafy plan should crazy old Badman ideas become law very clever indeed( im a lot brighter than some people think) but some how i dont think HCC will do anything to us we have Dr Tony Ludlow as one of the star witness on our side! so i dont think there will Tony said there given up on you! ya! but who knows but we be ready with clever idea that fox that nasty man Jack Cawthra!

    ReplyDelete