Skip to main content

Ben Haslam and the Laming Report Changes

The link is to a story about an autistic child in Bedfordshire.

What is interesting about this story is the interrelationship between potentially care proceedings (although having seen the video they talk about S20 which is not a care order) and the activities of the Local Education Authority.

It has been argued that the care system is being made to act in the interests of the LEA as a result of the reorganisation of the care system to place Childrens Social Services in with Education as Childrens Services.

I don't know enough about this particular case to make any judgment. I am, however, concerned about the over use of care proceedings in relation to children with ADHD and whose condition lies in the Aspergers Spectrum.

Interestingly this also relates to the close of an LA special school. The agenda of so called "inclusion" is clearly causing exclusion for some children. Perhaps in this case we should be questioning the closure of the special school rather than trying to work out the merits of "The Shires" at £250K pa or the LA's proposal at £120K pa. Frankly, however, given the current costs of care (residential or foster) it strikes me as odd that the LA's costs are as low as they claim.

However, there is a great resistance to working with parents (and the extended family) in Childrens Specialised Services. This cannot be good for the children.

Comments

Linda Jack said…
I know a little about Beds Social Services having been Unison Branch Secretary and had to deal with a lot of their incompetence. I absolutely agree with you on this. I met someone whilst canvassing in Luton during the GE who told a terrible tale of the impact the closure of a respite home had had on them. Happy to talk to you about this if you like

L
chaslam said…
In Ben's case all agreed that continuity of care was vital and the only solution offered to the parents was for this special school + care home solution. Other special schools in and out of county was asked about but deemed unsuitable by the LEA. The 'package' approach meant taking Ben into care was the only solution being offered by the Local Authority. No able child would ever be treated in this way. It is pure discrimination. It also gives Ben nothing like the 24/7 52 week a year education that he is currently thriving on at the Shires.

Your comment on costs is interesting as the costs cited by the LEA were those given to the tribunal which was a single figure. However, on seeing the breakdown, we felt that the costs did not add up to the agreed care level (although an official up-to-date statement is still outstanding). However, to submit this as evidence to the High Court appeal would have meant making a counter appeal that would have cost tens of thousands of pounds.

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men:

The Labour Candidate's Book Promotion Tour and Why It Matters

In the 2015 General Election the Labour Candidate criticised John Hemming for having an external interest and made a pledge that she would be a "Full Time MP for Yardley and my only other job will be mom & carer ...".  Here is a copy of that pledge:


Since that point she has been working on paid Television Programmes and has also written a book. John Hemming has made no secret of the fact that he chairs the board of the company he founded in 1983. This involves one meeting a month. When he was the MP for Yardley he was a full time MP and the Job of being MP for Yardley came first. The Labour candidate has reported 1,274 hours of work other than being an MP in the two years she has been elected and her income in the last year was over £131,000.

Ignoring the question as to how she reconciles that with her "pledge" the question is raised as to what extent her external activity conflicts with the role of Member of Parliament for Yardley. She is supposed to de…