§
Lords amendment: No. 25, in page 6, line 27, leave out subsections (3) and (4) and insert—
(3) Where an opinion has in pursuance of subsection (1) or (2) been given in the case of a child that he is a disabled person and it subsequently appears to the responsible authority—
and (in either case) that he will be under the age of 19 on the relevant date, the authority shall give to the appropriate officer written notification for the purposes of subsection (4) of the date referred to in paragraph (a) or (b); and any such notification shall be given not later than the relevant date and not earlier than four months before that date.In this subsection "the relevant date" means the date falling 8 months before the date referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) above.
(3A) If at any time it appears to a local education authority—
that authority shall, as soon as is reasonably practicable, give to the appropriate officer written notification for the purposes of subsection (4) of that date.(4) When the appropriate officer receives a notification given with respect to any person under subsection (3) or (3A), he shall (subject to subsections (4A) and (4B)) make arrangements for the local authority of which he is an officer to carry out an assessment of the needs of that person with respect to the provision by that authority of any statutory services for that person in accordance with any of the welfare enactments, and any such assessment shall be carried out—
(4A) If—
1331
the authority shall give written notification of the relevant facts to that officer as soon as is reasonably practicable; and on receiving any such notification that officer shall cease to be required under subsection (4) to make arrangements for the assessment of the needs of the person in question (but without prejudice to the operation of that subsection in relation to any further notification given with respect to that person under subsection (3) or (3A)).(4B) Nothing in subsection (4) shall require the appropriate officer to make arrangements for the assessment of the needs of a person—
(4C) Regulations under paragraph 4 of Schedule 1 to the Education Act 1981 (assessments and statements of special educational needs) may, in relation to the transfer of statements made under section 7 of that Act, make such provision as appears to the Secretary of State to be necessary or expedient in connection with the preceding provisions of this section.
§ Mr. Tom ClarkeI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this we shall discuss the following Lords amendments: No. 26, in page 6, line 42, leave out from beginning to end of line 9 on page 7 and insert—
the appropriate officer", in relation to the child or person referred to in the provision of this section in question, means such officer as may be appointed for the purposes of this section by the local authority for the area in which that child or person is for the time being ordinarily resident;No. 27, in page 7, line 12, leave out "college of further education" and insert "further education establishment".
§ Mr. ClarkeAlthough the amendments to this clause are long and complex, they are necessary to give substance to the principle accepted by the House on Report—that there should be a social services assessment before disabled children leave full-time education either at school or a further education establishment.
The notification by LEAs to the social services of the school leaving date must take place not earlier than 12 months after, and not later than eight months before, that date. The social services assessment must be arranged within five months of that notification. Therefore, it should be undertaken at least three months before the young person leaves school, which should give the authorities time to make whatever practical arrangements are necessary.
The great bulk of amendment No. 25 concerns what should happen if it is not possible to give eight months' notice because of a late decision or because a child moves school to another area after the procedures in subsections (1) and (2) have taken place. The same is true of the new clause introduced by amendment No. 33, which requires the local education authority to keep under review the expected school leaving dates of disabled children covered by clause 3 and which, in conjunction with amendment No. 29, specifies that the LEA responsible for a disabled person when he leaves full-time education at school shall remain responsible during his time in further education.
It is fair to say that further education is still a very grey area, especially for disabled people. Further education was omitted from the 1981 Act, partly on the understanding that a review of the legal basis of further education was in progress. That review has apparently evaporated, and the hole identified by the Warnock report is still there. The new clause, however, gives me hope that the DES is beginning to look favourably on maintaining statements of disabled children during further education. Indeed, it is the obvious logical next step.
1332 Only two items have been lost in the transformation of this clause, and I should like to mention them. In the original Bill, the notification could take place only with the consent of the parent or disabled person. Subsection (4B) now allows only the parent or young person to decline the subsequent assessment—the previous notification will be automatic. I hope that LEAs will be encouraged to give parents or the disabled student full information about the Bill's requirements at that earlier stage.
The second loss—I understand for legal reasons—is that students who are over 19 on the date eight months before they are due to leave are excluded from the Bill. I believe that the guidance to LEAs and social services departments should ask them to be included, albeit on a non-statutory basis. I hope that the Minister will be able to comment on this.
I should like to thank the Minister and his officials for their hard work on the complex drafting of this clause. I hope that he will answer any detailed questions on the wording. On implementation, which is also crucial here, it seems to me that, as the whole clause depends on the formal opinion as to whether the child is disabled given by the social services under subsection (1) or (2) soon after his 14th birthday, it is absolutely essential for the clause to be brought into force immediately so that the whole process can begin.
I remind the House that the purpose of subsection (1) was simply to exclude non-disabled children from the later procedures—in most cases it will be obvious to everyone that a child is disabled. I hope, therefore, that severely disabled children now over 14 who may never fall within subsection (1) will not necessarily be excluded from the benefits of notification and assessment. I should have thought that LEAs could be encouraged to operate notification of obviously disabled children and young people informally this autumn, and social services departments could be asked to make assessments before they leave school or college next summer. I shall listen to the Minister with great interest and care.
§ Mr. Alfred MorrisAlthough clause 5 has more than doubled in length, the effect of the changes is minor, which will perhaps remind the House of one of the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bow and Poplar (Mr. Mikardo). I agree with the Minister's tribute to my hon. Friend. We have had a virtuoso performance from him today.
One slight disappointment that I have is that, for legal reasons, under subsection (3), the clause will apply only to disabled people who are under 19 on the day eight months prior to their presumed leaving date. The Department of Education and Science has informally promised to advise local education authorities to apply the same procedures for people just over 19, and the DHSS has promised to do the same for social services departments whose duties under subsection (4) apply only to those formally notified under subsection (3). It would be helpful if that commitment were to be stated in the House today. I hope that the Minister will do so when he replies.
§ Mr. NewtonAs the hon. Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke) explained, the amendments to this part of the Bill, although a further formidable compliment to the powers of the draftsman, basically tidy up the Bill. The most significant change has been to reduce the advance 1333 notification of the expected school leaving date for a disabled child or young person from nine months to eight months.
Many tributes have been paid this morning and perhaps I might add another—to the Department of Education and Science officials who have also worked hard, especially in respect of this part of the Bill. They have undoubtedly contributed to it. The hon. Gentleman referred to the position of disabled young people who remain in full-time education after the age of 19. Formally, clause 3 covers only disabled people in full-time education under the age of 19 on the date that notification is due. However, if they become 19 during the notice period it will not affect the duty of the appropriate officer to make the necessary assessments under the welfare enactments. The reason for that restriction is because full-time schooling under the Education Act 1944 and the making of statements for those at school under the Education Act 1981 is geared to the maximum age of 19 years. It is necessarily within those constraints that the amendments have been drafted.
12.45 pm
However, the Government have no wish to deprive disabled young people who stay on in full-time education after the age of 19 of rights which they would have enjoyed had they decided to leave full-time education at 19. We shall make that clear in guidance to local education authorities and social services departments. I hope that that is a helpful assurance to the House.
I turn to the now hallowed issue of implementation. If possible, we should like to bring the provisions into effect in time to benefit disabled young people leaving full-time education in the summer of 1987, that is by the autumn of this year. We shall be consulting urgently with local authority associations about achieving that. It has been pointed out that children leaving school next summer could not in any case fall within the scope of clause 3(1)(a), which requires an opinion as to whether a child is disabled to be recorded at the first annual review of the statement by the local education authority after his 14th birthday. However, we shall consider with the local authority associations whether any administrative way can be found of enabling children who have already at the time the clause comes into effect had this review to benefit from the notification and assessment provisions provided for in the later parts of the clause. I hope that the House will find that assurance helpful.
The hon. Member for Monklands, West asked about the duty of local education authorities to give parents and young people full information about assessments. I am happy to give him an assurance that we shall aim to cover the point that local education authorities should be encouraged to give full information about assessments to both parents and young people in the guidance which we hope to issue. I hope that that will all be of help to the House and that it will accede to the motion to accept the amendment.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords amendments agreed to.