SEND Provision: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham

Motion made and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Anna McMorrin.)

21:52:00

I have secured this Adjournment debate to discuss the provision of special educational needs and disabilities in the London borough of Barking and Dagenham, an area that I am honoured to partially represent alongside my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan). The backdrop to this debate is multifaceted, but my focus this evening is specifically on the pressure facing provision for children and young people. There are currently over 5,500 children and young people in Barking and Dagenham schools who require SEN support. As of January 2025, 3,111 of these young people had an education, health and care plan—or EHCP, as they are more commonly referred to—with the following breakdown: 12 at nursery level; 1,350 at primary; 946 at secondary; 480 post-16; and 323 post-19. This clearly highlights that present pressures are felt most acutely across primary and secondary schools in Barking and Dagenham. In 2022, requests for EHCP assessments saw a rise of 100%, an increase four times the national average, and in April 2025 there were 1,000 more children with EHCPs in the borough compared with January 2023, which is a 50% increase over 15 months. Since these spikes, the level of demand has remained high, with 500 to 600 new requests every year. This is partly due to population growth and churn, with about 26,000 additional residents since 2014, and a similar number of about 18% churn. It is also worth noting that Barking and Dagenham still offers some of the cheapest housing options in London, which accounts for the sheer scale of the population growth. In 2024, 150 children and young people with existing EHCPs moved into, or were placed in, Barking and Dagenham from other boroughs, with around 40% requiring a specialist placement. Staff working in the education, health and care team at Barking and Dagenham council are recording caseloads of 200 to 300 per staff member, which is just not sustainable as a working model.

I commend the hon. Lady for bringing this issue forward; she is right to do so. Does she agree that the progress on SEN action has shown how early intervention with a classroom assistant can make all the difference for many children, and that it is essential that the funding for teaching assistants is retained to ensure that the children in both St Joseph’s primary school in Dagenham and St Finian’s primary school in Newtownards have access to early intervention support and a bright future?

The hon. Gentleman makes some very good points. The Minister was discussing that issue this afternoon and tomorrow my hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Nesil Caliskan) will have a debate on that very point. Alongside that, the growing pressures in the health system and the shortages of educational psychologists, speech and language therapists and occupational therapists all serve to make the issue worse. As it currently stands, there is very little likelihood that the EHC teams will be able to meet the demand in Barking and Dagenham.

I hear the heartbreaking stories from Barking and Dagenham about the huge demand for SEND provision and the difficulty in meeting it. In Surrey, we have similarly heartbreaking cases of children with autism who cannot move out of mainstream school because the capacity is not there. As a result, one of my constituents is getting bullied terribly and the council has refused to fund his place in a specialist school. But that story is not unique in Surrey or in Barking and Dagenham. Despite that, the county council leader, Tim Oliver, claimed that the vast majority of SEND families in Surrey are happy with their support. That is despite the council suppressing a survey of 1,000 parents for six months—

Order. The hon. Gentleman’s intervention is far too long. As the Adjournment started before 10 o’clock, he will of course be free to make a speech.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his points. That is happening against a backdrop of 14 years with no investment for councils and they are really struggling. On behalf of the local authority, I urge the Department for Education to invest more in the development of truly inclusive schools, well-funded and resourced, so that Barking and Dagenham can increase the provision of SEND support in a mainstream setting. If the local authority could ensure a high standard of support through on-site additionally resourced provision and other mainstream settings, that would reassure the parents of children with SEND that their child’s educational needs will be met without reliance on an EHCP. I think that would help to significantly reduce stress and anxiety, which the hon. Gentleman alluded to, for thousands of people in our borough. Having spoken to many parents of children with SEND across my constituency, I know that they have to fight for everything and that in most cases they get little to no support at present without an EHCP in place. The system is too convoluted, and it does not work for parents, children or local authorities. More needs to be done to streamline the assessment process, so that parents are not jumping through hoops for months on end, and that the best possible care and educational support can be delivered without the constant battle that parents currently face. When considering the provision of services in Barking and Dagenham, we must also take account of the level of deprivation and the impact that has on the level of need. Barking and Dagenham has the 21st highest deprivation score of the 317 local authorities in England, with 62% of households in the borough having at least one measure of deprivation as measured on the index of multiple deprivation. Furthermore, 46% of children in Barking and Dagenham are estimated to live in poverty, which is the third highest across England and Wales. Deprivation on such a scale means that we have some of the poorest health outcomes in London, and 30% of all households in the borough are home to a resident with some form of disability that requires a support service. The council is trying really hard to find innovative means to support the growing demand for services in the face of mounting financial pressure, but it simply does not have the resources to establish long-term stability in that respect. Barking and Dagenham has one of the highest proportions of additional resourced provision in the country, with almost a third of schools in the borough hosting an ARP.

22:00:00

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Anna McMorrin.)

There are now 33 primary and secondary ARPs in the borough, compared with just 14 a decade ago. Over that period, the number of children who rely on the services has increased from around 180 to 450. Despite the creation of 230 specialist places over a four-year period, with 90 more planned by September this year, thereby increasing the proportion of children with SEND in mainstream schools, the local authority still faces a monumental challenge to provide enough places to support the needs of all the children who require them. Over the past decade, the local authority has worked diligently to ensure that our schools are inclusive, and has aimed to place children and young people with SEND in local mainstream schools where possible. This has resulted in many of those children going on to achieve very well. Taking this approach has enabled the council to manage the dedicated schools grant high needs block within budget, despite chronic underfunding over the past 14 years under the previous Government—so much so that in 2024, Barking and Dagenham was recognised for effective practice and referenced in a What Works in SEND publication released by the Isos Partnership. To a degree, the local authority is a victim of its own success in this area. When low housing costs are combined with exceptional SEND provision that delivers good educational outcomes, is it any wonder that the parents of children with complex needs are moving to Barking and Dagenham? Over the years, I have heard many stories from constituents who have moved to the area specifically for that reason. Most come from other London boroughs, but some are from as far afield as Cornwall. At this point, I would like to personally thank the Secretary of State for Education for her visit to Becontree primary school earlier this year. The visit attracted positive press for our SEND provision, and highlighted the inclusive approach to SEND education in Barking and Dagenham schools. From an outside perspective, given the sterling service provided, it might seem that the concerns and pressures that the local authority and I have portrayed are being overstated, yet under the surface the council is facing a perfect storm of increasing demand and significant funding shortfalls. In the last financial year, Barking and Dagenham faced a significant overspend, which was covered using council reserves. The local authority had the capacity to balance the budget in that way for only one year. Although the £1 billion of additional Government funding for the high needs block in 2025-26 is welcome, it does not fully address the pressures in Barking and Dagenham. The £5.3 million uplift serves only to cover the current in-year demands, without consideration of the significant level of growth in the borough. It is clear to me that the high needs block funding allocation formula needs to be reviewed and updated to ensure that it is evidence based and better targeted. The high needs block funding stream is still to an extent determined by historical data, and does not reflect the changing patterns of need in London, so boroughs like Barking and Dagenham find themselves underfunded compared with inner-London boroughs, while managing the increasing demand from families who have moved out of better funded inner-London areas. The crisis in SEND provision in early years and education is not due to a lack of good intent, but is perpetuated through long-term under-investment, the fragmentation of services and a degree of inflexibility that the last Government built into the system.

I am glad the hon. Lady recognises the funding disparity between inner Greater London and outer Greater London. She will be aware of the DABD charity, which is based in her constituency. It provides special educational needs support for young children during the summer, Christmas and Easter terms, but the charity has been defunded, so it cannot carry on its activities for young people based in the London borough of Havering, which the hon. Lady also represents. Will she join me in calling for Havering council to ensure that that funding continues so that those children can get the benefit the charity provides?

I thank the hon. Gentleman. My seat covers two councils, and I always want the best outcome for my constituents. I agree with him and would be happy to do that. Councils are on the frontline of service delivery in Britain and although this debate is not about broader service funding, I must take this opportunity to thank the Government and to welcome the introduction of the recovery grant as part of the most recent local government funding settlement—a move that marked a significant step change from the previous Administration. However, I return to the subject of SEND provision and funding allocation, which desperately needs a similar step change, as I begin to conclude my contribution. The London borough of Barking and Dagenham is doing everything that the Government are asking of it, yet we are still working to a system built by the Conservatives. The last Government allocated safety valve funding based on the scale of the deficit rather than the scale of need. The safety valve agreements essentially mean that a local authority must cut its spending to meet targets; in return, it gets a contribution towards its overspend. That means that our local authority, having worked to implement inclusive strategies, often through innovative means, to reduce pressures on the high needs budget, gets nothing from that funding stream. In comparison, authorities such as Kent, which have far less deprivation and need, have received in excess of £42.6 million since 2023-24. A fraction of that money would help Barking and Dagenham maintain and progress the inclusive service it has worked so hard to deliver over the past decade. I must say that it is wonderful to see our inclusive SEND provision under the national spotlight, being championed by Ministers, but it still beggars belief that under the current system, if a local authority manages to fly in the face of low expectation and deliver an exemplary service, it is penalised within the safety valve programme. I hope that, as the Government get to grips with the SEND crisis facing local authorities in the coming years, a process of co-production and consultation will lead to a delivery model that incentivises the inclusive approach taken in Barking and Dagenham. Local authorities such as ours are desperately calling for a national funding formula that allocates resources based on evidence and need, bringing schools, health partners, parents of children with SEND, and the council together. I know that we can build a service that provides the best possible start in life and outstanding educational outcomes for the most disadvantaged young people in our communities. I end by repeating the Government’s mantra from last July: “It’s time for change”.

22:07:00

I was moved by the speech just made by the hon. Member for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane) and heartened to hear about the effectiveness of SEND provision in Barking and Dagenham. It is so important that we have effective examples of that in the country—particularly at the moment, when the Government are considering their national SEND provision. It was encouraging for me to hear that. From my experience in my constituency, a vital part of what we have to do is tackling the culture of dishonesty that certainly exists in my local authority—I do not know about elsewhere. That culture is a key barrier to effectively addressing SEND provision. The issue could not be more serious. Constituents of mine—suicidal children with autism—are repeatedly denied the support that is their right. Desperate parents come to me, their MP, trying to beg the council to do its duty. The level of dishonesty is hard to exaggerate. Surrey has the highest level of complaints to tribunals in the country. It covered that up for over 14 months from its own internal council scrutiny committees. The county council leader then denied that in a formal written response to the Liberal Democrat Members of Parliament in Surrey. The council’s next trick, as reported by ITV, was to reclassify complaints as “inquiries”, to try to manipulate its complaints volumes. It then denied that there was a problem at all and said that the problem was, in fact, that Surrey parents are “too articulate”. Most recently, the county council leader said in the annual general meeting that “the vast majority” of Surrey SEND parents have a good experience of SEND. That was despite them suppressing for six months a survey of 1,000 SEND parents in which only 16% said that they trusted the county council on SEND and only 21% said that they trusted case officers to act in the best interests of their child. It is a matter of extreme concern for me that the Government are putting so much faith in local authorities on SEND reform when, certainly in my case, they are so manifestly dishonest. I am particularly worried about Surrey, because the county council leader is chairman of the County Councils Network and so has major influence over SEND reform across the country. I am also worried about the fact that local authorities are saying that the way to solve the SEND crisis is to water down parents’ right to apply for an EHCP. There are many things wrong with the SEND system, but that is the one thing parents do have confidence in. It may take far too long to get an EHCP, but at least they have their legal rights and can go to tribunal. I desperately hope that the Government are not going to water down their commitments and that they will respond to the call of my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Dr Pinkerton) for an investigation into Surrey county council. Only then will my constituents be able to get the justice that they deserve and the opportunities that they desperately need.

22:11:00

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane) for securing this crucial debate. Children with special educational needs have just as much potential as other children, and they deserve to have that potential nurtured. But for boroughs such as Barking and Dagenham, there is an urgent problem with SEND provision. As my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham has eloquently described, chronic underfunding and under-resourcing of vital SEND services has led to a critical situation whereby children are not getting the support that they need and parents are facing a constant battle and excessive waiting times to secure any support for their child. Last year in the borough, only 50% of decisions on EHCP needs assessments were made within six weeks, the rest taking much longer. I know that this is a problem facing all boroughs, but it is particularly acute in Barking and Dagenham, which has a higher proportion of people applying for EHCP needs assessments than other boroughs. In my constituency, which is home to the boroughs of both Redbridge and Barking and Dagenham, the rate of disability is far higher in wards such as Marks Gate, which is the only ward in Ilford South that falls under Barking and Dagenham. Against this backdrop of underfunding and comparatively high demand, Barking and Dagenham has a lot to be proud of. As my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham said, in 2024 the borough was recognised for effective practice in a report by What Works in SEND. However, there are some problems that good practice and perseverance cannot fix. The crisis in SEND stems from the wider issue of changing demographics and an outdated funding formula that has not kept up. Ilford South and the boroughs of Barking and Dagenham and Redbridge may be outer-London areas, but they are facing inner-London problems.

The hon. Member mentions Barking and Dagenham and Redbridge, but Havering is also in outer Greater London, and Marks Gate is next to Collier Row, as he knows. We are all underfunded. There is a total disparity when it comes to funding for outer Greater London areas. Will the hon. Member back my ongoing campaign for fairer funding not only for special educational needs but for a range of areas, because our boroughs on the edge of London and in Essex constituencies which fall within Greater London are not getting our fair share of resources?

I thank the hon. Member for raising that point. As a matter of fact, as leader of Redbridge council, I campaigned for many years for outer London funding to be fairer. Outer London has inner-London problems, but we are not getting our fair share of funding. I would be happy to get involved on the funding needs of outer London. I mentioned Barking and Dagenham and Redbridge because my constituency falls in both of them, but I agree that other outer London boroughs such as Havering will suffer similar consequences. Our outer-London boroughs face inner-London problems that diminutive outer-London funding packages cannot fix. If we are to fully support all children by providing them with the tailored support that they need, and if we are to unlock their potential, we need serious reform. I stand with my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham in calling for three key reforms. First, we need a change to the outdated funding formula that puts boroughs such as Barking and Dagenham, Redbridge and Havering on the back foot. Secondly, we need more funding for additionally resourced provisions, so that children with special educational needs can be supported in mainstream schools, and can reap the benefits of learning in a mainstream environment—benefits that include a reduction in emotional distress, and better educational outcomes—while teachers are given the resources they need. Thirdly, we need a more streamlined process of needs assessment, so that parents are not left alone to fight for the provision that their children need and deserve. Every child has the right to thrive, to achieve their dreams, and to be supported in their environment, even if they learn a little differently, but SEND provision is struggling. We owe it to children to fix the system. We owe it to their parents to support their children to thrive.

22:16:00

Congratulations to my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane) on securing this debate on an incredibly important subject. I know that she and other hon. Members in the Chamber have an interest in supporting families in their constituencies in navigating the special educational needs system; hon. Members have conveyed compellingly just how complex it can be. In her powerful speech, my hon. Friend made clear her interest in the subject, and her passion for the improvements that need to be made. I reassure hon. Members that improving the SEND system is a priority for the Government. We want all children to feel that they belong in a mainstream setting, if that is the best place for them to have their needs met. We want them to receive the right support, succeed in their education, and lead happy, healthy and productive adult lives. We know that is possible. We have seen it in innovative examples across the country, including when the Secretary of State visited Becontree primary school in Dagenham in December. It was heartening to hear my hon. Friend’s account of the practice in Barking and Dagenham, but much more needs to be done to improve the system for children and their families, and to ensure consistent good practice in every part of the country. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Dorking and Horley (Chris Coghlan) and my hon. Friend the Member for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) for their contributions. It is clear that there is much shared interest in this issue, and their contributions were an important part of this timely debate. Every child, regardless of their needs, deserves the opportunity to achieve, thrive and succeed. We are absolutely clear that the system is too difficult for parents, carers and young people to navigate, and it is simply not delivering the outcomes that we want.

In the 2023-24 academic year, more than 1,800 SEND children in Surrey were out of school for more than a third of the time. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that promised schools are delivered? I think in particular of the Betchwood Vale academy SEND school in my constituency.

I know the hon. Gentleman cares passionately about this issue, and he is clearly keen to see the expansion of provision. As he knows, we are investing in the capital estate in the round, and supporting mainstream schools to expand. We have already given local authorities the funding, and we hope that they are working with their local schools to increase capacity. Obviously, the building of any additional schools is considered in the light of that, because we need to ensure that the right provision is available for the children who need it. We are giving close consideration to that, and are working closely with local authorities, whose duty it is to make sure that they have the places to meet those needs. We have announced that the details of our longer-term approach to SEND reform will be set out in the schools White Paper in the autumn. We are not wasting any time on this. We are already working to ensure that children and young people get the support they need; we are building a robust evidence base about what works to drive inclusive education, and we are creating the expert advisory group for inclusion, led by Tom Rees. We are introducing new regional improvement for standards and excellence—RISE—advisers, who will work with mainstream schools to ensure that they become more inclusive. We are extending PINS—partnerships for inclusion of neurodiversity in schools—to a further cohort of mainstream primary schools, so that we build teacher and staff capacity to identify, and better meet, the needs of neurodivergent children in mainstream school settings. We are prioritising early intervention and inclusive provision in mainstream settings, because early intervention prevents unmet needs from escalating, and is the best way to support all children and young people to achieve their goals alongside their peers. We are committed to working with the sector and our partners to ensure that our approach is fully planned, and developed in partnership with families, stakeholders and the entire sector, which needs to deliver these reforms. The number of education, health and care plans has increased each year since their introduction in 2014, with over 630,000 children and young people having an EHCP as of January 2025. Over time, flaws and lack of capacity in the system to meet lower-level need have put additional strain on specialist services. That has had a really detrimental impact on the experience of accessing support through the EHCP process, and has contributed to pushing up costs and creating an increasingly unsustainable system. The latest data shows that in 2024, just over 46% of new EHCPs were issued within the 20-week timeframe. The Government want to ensure that EHC need assessments are progressed promptly, and that plans are issued quickly to provide children and young people with the support that they need to achieve positive outcomes. Independently commissioned insights published last year showed that extensive improvements to the system using early intervention and better resourcing of mainstream schools could have a significant impact, with more children and young people having their needs met without an EHCP, and in a mainstream setting, rather than in a specialist placement. We have listened to parents, local authority colleagues and partners right across education, health and social care. We are considering really carefully how to improve the EHCP process for families, and are reflecting on what practices could or should be made consistent nationally. Children and young people with SEND frequently require access to additional support from a broad, specialist workforce right across education, health and care. To support the demand, in partnership with NHS England, we are funding early language support for every child: ELSEC. This is trialling new ways of working to better identify and support children with speech, language and communication needs in their early years and at primary school. I have seen this in practice, and seen the difference it makes to not just the children who participate in the programme and clearly thrive as a result, but the teaching workforce, who grow in confidence and in their ability to untap and unlock children’s learning. It is having a great impact, and we are keen to see the results of the pilot, the roll-out, and the impact taking root in schools. Continuing to ensure a pipeline of speech and language therapists is essential. That is why we have introduced a speech and language degree apprenticeship. It is in its third year of delivery, and it offers a really excellent alternative pathway to the traditional degree route into a successful career as a speech and language therapist. Of course, we need many more such therapists. It takes a vast workforce, from teachers to teaching assistants, and from early years educators to allied health professionals, to help children and young people thrive, and we are investing in each of those areas to improve outcomes and experiences across the country. I am aware of the ten-minute rule Bill sponsored by my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham, which is on this very issue, and is due to be presented in the House tomorrow. High-quality teaching is central to ensuring that pupils with SEND are given the best possible opportunity to achieve in their education, so to support teachers, we are implementing high-quality teacher development. It begins with their initial teacher training, continues into their early teaching career, and carries on right through to middle and senior leadership. We want to offer professional development to all teachers, so that they have the skills to support all pupils to succeed, including those with SEND. The partnership for inclusion of neurodiversity in schools is also deploying health and education specialists in the workforce to upskill primary schools, so that they can support neurodivergent children. The support operates on a whole-school level and is not reliant on a diagnosis. That support is there for all children, depending on their needs. Local authorities need support with their educational psychology services, and we are investing over £21 million to train 400 more educational psychologists. As these trainees complete their studies, they will be able to join the workforce and support local authority education services, including by contributing to statutory assessments. We know those assessments are a big challenge, and workforce shortages are a huge barrier to delivering our ambition for an inclusive mainstream education system.

A lot of positive things are being said that will be welcomed on all sides of the House, but does the Minister acknowledge the concerns of the hon. Members for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane) and for Ilford South (Jas Athwal) and me about the huge disparity in funding for boroughs such as Barking and Dagenham, Redbridge, and Havering, in particular? We are not getting our fair share. Will she please help outer-London boroughs get a fairer share of the cake, because at the moment that is simply not happening?

I recognise the challenge that the hon. Member and others have set out. We are looking at the national funding formula. Obviously, this cannot happen as fast as one might want, because it is important to maintain stability in the system, and changes from year to year can create challenges for local authorities and schools. We have to look at the system carefully and introduce any changes in a careful and considered way, and that is what we are doing. We are taking on board the representations that we are receiving about the funding currently in the system. One other area that we are focused on is capital funding to expand the estate. Many mainstream settings are going above and beyond to deliver specialist provision, but we want to ensure that all capacity is maximised. Where a local authority identifies a school that could provide more places or make more provision, we need to ensure that it has the capital to support that. That is why we have allocated £740 million for the 2025-26 year to deliver those additional places in mainstream and special schools and other specialist settings, or to adapt buildings to make them more accessible and more appropriate for providing inclusive mainstream education. The Department’s spending review has confirmed the funding for reform of the SEND system; we will set out the details in the White Paper in the autumn. We recognise that local authorities will need support during the transition to a reformed SEND system, so we will commence a phased transition. We will work with local authorities to manage their budgets and deficits. That will come alongside an extension to the dedicated schools grant statutory override up until the 2027-28 financial year, because we recognise the time it will take to put this right. We will provide more details on this by the end of the year. We are running out of time, but I want to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dagenham and Rainham again for bringing this matter forward, and to thank all who have contributed to the debate. We have made a clear commitment to addressing the challenges, so that we can help children and young people to achieve and thrive. I am determined that progress will be made on this issue. I conclude by recognising all those who work in our education, health and care systems, and who work for our children and young people with SEND in Barking and Dagenham, and right across the country. We all want to deliver the best for children and young people, including those with SEND, so that they have the best start in life; and we want to prepare them for life, work and the future. The Government will continue to work to that end. Question put and agreed to.

22:30:00