tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11537793614421911302024-02-08T03:49:41.166-08:00BLOG FOR VICTORY!!This blogroll is intended to celebrate the diversity in home education in the UK and the passion we share for defending it. If you would like to contribute to this blog, or to have a blog added to the blogroll, please contact me :)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-65473191748105345992011-01-22T04:14:00.000-08:002011-01-22T04:14:53.440-08:00Heads Up - Wales"EDUCATION experts last night called for tighter regulation of home schooling in Wales as new statistics show the number of children being taught outside of schools."...<br />
<br />
<br />
read the article here...<br />
<a href="http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/education-news/2011/01/20/revealed-the-hundreds-of-welsh-children-being-educated-at-home-91466-28018759/">http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/education-news/2011/01/20/revealed-the-hundreds-of-welsh-children-being-educated-at-home-91466-28018759/</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-45935247076850609992010-11-21T13:51:00.000-08:002010-11-21T13:51:08.433-08:00CME postcardThere's a postcard over <a href="http://freedomineducationunderthreat.blogspot.com/2010/11/cme-postcard_21.html">>>>>HERE<<<<</a> that you can print off and send to your MP about making changes to CME legislation....<br />
....and some useful links as well in case you're wondering why you might want to ;)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-77815951751855755962010-05-12T10:09:00.000-07:002010-05-12T10:09:19.982-07:00"I'm over here! Leave me alone!"Whatever your personal politics, I think almost all home educators will have breathed a sigh of relief yesterday, that at least our freedom to home educate, in a way that suits our children best, looks safe under the new government.<br />
Talk now seems to be turning to what would be the best course of action to take with this new government. Personally, I don't intend to take any. I intend to spend some time living, loving and learning, working, resting and playing, reclaiming as many of those many hours of freedom that were stolen from our lives last year as possible. <br />
I know there are those who will/do disagree with me on this, who think that now is the time to make ourselves, and our cause, known to our MPs, to remind them why they should not try to introduce anything like this again, but I don't think it is either wise, or necessary, to bring renewed attention to ourselves. I think keeping vigilant is important, I think we would be foolish not to, but I also think that shouting "I'm over here! Leave me alone!" is a pretty contradictory message to be calling out!Unknownnoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-81624857263485839642010-04-08T07:04:00.000-07:002010-05-12T10:24:35.467-07:00What's next? Well keep on keeping on of course! ;o)There is a lot of talk at the moment of the election and how best to use your vote to ensure that Labour are voted out. If Labour are re-elected, there is little doubt that the CSF Bill will be reintroduced. Ed Balls is not a happy chappy at the moment, and I don't think for a second that he is the sort of person to let things go! <br />
My own personal feelings on that are<a href="http://meandchis.blogspot.com/2010/04/political-broadcast-on-behalf-of-what.html"> here</a>, but I don't think it is my place to try and influence how others will use their votes.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
If this campaign has shown me anything, it's that there are a lot more people out there, than I ever realised, who just don't get how it works, but it has also shown me that there are an awful lot of us out there who are very capable of showing exactly how and why it does. And what is equally, if not more, important to focus on now I think, as who people will or won't be voting for, is that we keep on making sure that the positives of home education are out there for all to see, and that the lies and misconceptions and stereotypes about home education continue to be challenged. <br />
<br />
Keep on keeping on and all that jazz :o)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-11193325207492142352010-04-07T11:16:00.000-07:002010-04-07T11:16:07.289-07:00☺☻☺☻☺Happy Happy ☺☻☺☻☺It's <a href="http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/news/index.cfm?event=news.item&id=statement_on_the_children_schools_and_families_bill">here</a>, IN WRITING :)<br />
<br />
"...some key provisions have been taken out because no agreement could be reached between the Government and opposition parties...<br />
<ul><li>Registration and monitoring of home education ..."</li>
</ul>I know it's only the battle, and not the war, but Happy Happy anyway and today is definitely a day for celebrating <br />
<div align="center"><span style="font-size: x-large;">☺</span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-31969698019342167552010-04-05T16:07:00.000-07:002010-04-05T16:12:08.608-07:00'Wash up' it is then..."Gordon Brown will announce on Tuesday morning that the general election will, as expected, be held on 6 May, BBC political editor Nick Robinson says".... so one way or another the fate of the CSF Bill and all it's clauses will be decided this month... read more <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8603591.stm">here</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-88496221386682819432010-04-02T14:47:00.000-07:002010-04-05T16:08:00.304-07:00Feeling cautiously optimisticTo be honest I have felt like everything has been in a somewhat precarious limbo since the CSF Bill went to the Lords. It's all gone a bit quiet, but that doesn't mean it's gone away. However, reading <a href="http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6040323">this</a> today in the TES gives us some hope (I hope!)<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">"<em>Central elements of unpopular Bill likely to be shelved in pre-poll ‘wash-up’"</em></div><div style="text-align: center;"><em>...</em></div><div style="text-align: center;"><em>"Vast swathes of the unpopular Children, Schools and Families Bill, currently being debated in the House of Lords, will be scrapped as the Bill is forced into law ahead of the general election, which is expected to be called next week."</em></div><div style="text-align: center;"><em>...</em></div><em></em><br />
<em>"Also in line for the axe are most of the pupil and parent guarantees, such as a “right to PE”, <span style="color: red;">as well as reforms to rules on home education, which would have required home educators to register their children with the local authority</span>."</em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-70057048444141415652010-03-09T12:51:00.000-08:002010-03-09T14:10:09.621-08:00The good, the bad, and the DeechLast night saw the second reading of the CSF Bill in the House of Lords, you can read the transcript for yourself <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldhansrd/text/100308-0011.htm#10030854000239">here</a>, or watch it <a href="http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=6043">here</a>. There were no real surprises, although it has to be said that Baroness Deech excelled herself in an extraordinary display of hostility towards us.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">THE GOOD</div><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;"></span> <br />
<span style="color: black;">Lord Alton of Liverpool was ace, (and if you are watching rather than reading, the beard next to him was rather fine too! (go to about 5:28) <span style="color: #990000;">;0)</span><span style="color: black;">) he expressed <span style="color: purple;">'a general anxiety about the lack of scrutiny which this Bill received in another place and the danger that a truncated process in <span style="color: black;">[the Lords leading]</span> to a defective and flawed piece of legislation reaching the statute book.'</span></span> and went on to register his '<span style="color: purple;">strongest possible objection to Clause 26' </span><span style="color: black;">stating that '</span><span style="color: purple;">We should celebrate the diversity of this position and learn from it; not seek to crush it.' </span><span style="color: black;">and going on to quote from</span><span style="color: purple;"> 'a <a href="http://maire-staffordshire.blogspot.com/2010/02/letters-to-lords-and-ladies.html">letter</a> I received about the home-education provision from Professor and Mrs Bruce Stafford,' </span><span style="color: black;">and concluding '</span><span style="color: purple;">that the Badman review on which the relevant clauses in the Bill are based was poorly conducted. Fair and reasonable legislation cannot emerge from a flawed evidential review. There are already laws in place to protect a child where there is a suspicion that children are at risk of harm or that insufficient education is taking place. The Bill's proposals are opposed by the majority of home educators.'</span></span><br />
<span style="color: black;"><br />
Lord Lucas lived up to expectations! Beginning by likening the Bill to a nobbly potato which was rotten inside and full of slugs, and that he would like to cut out the part about home education. He said that while he sees legislation in this area as inevitable, there '<span style="color: purple;">seems to be something in the DCSF, which I have not identified in any of the people I have met, that is malevolent to home education and wishes to destroy it.' </span><span style="color: black;">He </span><span style="color: black;">questioned why none of the '<span style="color: purple;">good things in the Badman review, about training and support, appear in the Bill?' </span><span style="color: black;">and pointed out the obvious flaws in expecting autonomous educators to produce a syllabus in advance. </span></span>He made a number of points about support, bullying, and evidence from other countries, and then went on to make my favourite quote of the evening, when he dismissed the statistics used in the impact assessment as</span> <span style="color: purple;">'frankly duffy' </span><span style="color: black;">- from the mouths of peers eh! Bless him! </span><br />
<span style="color: black;"></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;">Baroness Walmsley was scathing of the '</span><span style="color: purple;">lack of debate on some parts of the Bill in another place <span style="color: black;">and</span> the last-minute amendments introduced by the Government' </span><span style="color: black;">She pointed out the confusion of</span> <span style="color: purple;">the child's right to an education with a child's right to safeguarding.</span> and the ignorance of the fact that social workers already have powers with regard to the latter, and added that '<span style="color: purple;">The death of Khyra Ishaq was nothing to do with home education, despite what has been suggested in the press</span>.' She described the government proposals as <span style="color: purple;">rushed, ill thought out and heavy-handed</span>, and <span style="color: purple;">in danger of enforcing a one-size-fits-all education. <span style="color: black;">but did support a light touch scheme of notification.</span></span><br />
<br />
Lord Bates didn't spend much time on home education, but what he did say was spot on...<br />
<span style="color: purple;"></span> <span style="color: purple;">'Faced with this staggering record of failure, what do we find is the target in the legislation that is needed to reverse this terrible record, particularly among the poorest in our society? The answer, of course, is to attack home schooling, when these are parents who are making huge sacrifices for the benefit of their children. Home schoolers are not failing children in this country; the state is. It is not the parents who take an interest in their children that we should be worried about; it is the parents who do not take any interest in their children that we should be worried about. When will the Government wake up to the problems that they face in their own state system? When will they stop obsessing over the spelk in the eyes of others, namely the home schoolers, and start addressing the plank in their own eye in terms of failing standards?'</span></span><br />
<br />
Baroness Verma referred to the letters stacked high on her desk about this bill, mostly about Clause 26 <span style="color: #990000;">;0) </span><span style="color: black;">and went on to speak of how Clause 26 '</span><span style="color: purple;">infringes the basic right of parents to decide what is in the best interests of their child' </span><span style="color: black;">and concluded that </span><span style="color: purple;">'This is a largely bad Bill.'</span><span style="color: black;">.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Baroness Bottomley of Nettlestone despite having '</span><span style="color: purple;">reservations about home education as a course of action'</span><span style="color: black;">, was damning of the way Government had handled things, raising the doubts borne by the Select Committee, giving mention to having been <span style="color: purple;">'bombarded with mail'</span> from home educating families, and concluding that </span><span style="color: purple;">'There seems to be maximum alienation, especially when the Government say that this is about supporting people involved in home education when it is blatantly obvious that they are getting no more financial or practical support in any way.' </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div align="center"><span style="color: black;">THE BAD</span></div><br />
<span style="color: black;">Lord Soley sadly lived up to expectations, speaking about his entries on Lords of the Blog and how he had been surprised by the amount of interest and comments they attracted! He spoke of the need for regulation and in comparing it to other countries, implied that it needed to be more rigorous, </span><span style="color: purple;">'Indeed, some countries such as Germany do not even allow home education to take place.' </span><span style="color: black;">He talked about the rights of the child, yet managed to overlook the child's right to be home educated, brought up Khyra Ishaq, managing to say that even though her case might not have had anything to do with home education, it still had something to do with home education (???) </span><br />
He was dismissive of bullying as something that<span style="color: purple;"> 'has always been around and is always a problem; you cannot avoid it altogether' </span><span style="color: black;">and that removing your children from such a situation was '</span><span style="color: purple;">overprotective'. <span style="color: black;">He</span><span style="color: black;"> was puzzled by peoples</span> '</span><span style="color: purple;">hostility to Graham Badman'</span><span style="color: black;"> so decided to re-read the report having not read it properly the first time - (clearly in a good, well informed position to comment on it when he wrote his blogs then!)</span><br />
<span style="color: black;">I found him to be a very unconvincing speaker, he clearly felt he needed to have something to say on the matter, but none of it (to me) came across as particularly well thought out, a lot of opinions, but not a lot of substance. His closing comments were that he did not have <span style="color: purple;">'the right answer, but home education is here to stay; it might well grow, but at the edges there will be very real problems, so we need a regulatory system that picks that up and responds to it. I hope that the Government will not lose sight of that. I think that they are addressing it quite well at the moment, but it is still very early days.' </span><span style="color: black;">, but, if anyone was listening to him, then a couple of time during his speech, he did do something that may actually work in our favour with regard to other peers - he asked them to go back to his <a href="http://lordsoftheblog.net/2010/02/08/home-education/">blog</a> <a href="http://lordsoftheblog.net/2010/02/10/home-education-round-two/">posts</a> and <a href="http://lordsoftheblog.net/2010/02/21/home-education-and-iran/">look</a> at the comments. Hopefully some of them will do just that, because there are some excellent comments there :0)</span></span><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;"> </span></span><span style="color: black;"></span><br />
<br />
Baroness Morgan barely gave the measures for the registration and monitoring of home educated children mention in her opening speech, and little more in her closing one, except for the expected dismissal of them as not being <span style="color: #741b47;"><span style="color: purple;">'onerous where home educators are doing a good job'</span> </span><span style="color: black;">- But who decides IF we are doing a good job, or on the definition of what a 'good job' is, we come back to that unanswered question of 'What is a suitable education?' and 'Who should decide that?'</span><br />
<br />
Baroness Blackstone thought that the <span style="color: purple;">'registration scheme for home education, following Graham Badman's report' <span style="color: black;">seemed</span> 'eminently sensible'</span><span style="color: black;">, going so far as to describe Badman as an '<span style="color: purple;">eminent expert'</span> and expressing her surprise at Baroness Verma's comments </span><span style="color: purple;">'given that so much of what lies behind the Bill comes from independent experts who have studied many of the issues in great depth.' </span><span style="color: black;">???</span><br />
<br />
The Lord Bishop of Bradford was disappointing, concentrating mostly on how the Bill would affect his son-in-law's career. Home Education got a brief mention at the end as being a '<span style="color: purple;">potentially controversial issue' </span><span style="color: black;">- 'potentially'? Hmmm, someone clearly hasn't been paying attention!</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">THE DEECH</div><br />
And then there was Deech. :-( I had expected this to be bad, but was still not quite prepared for the stream of poison that poured forth from her.<br />
She began by talking about those who had commented <a href="http://blog4victory.blogspot.com/2010/02/speechless-i-wish-they-were.html">on her blogposts</a> not painting a good picture of home education because of '<span style="color: purple;">the rage and resentment they express, their mishmash of ideological views, their rejection of state interference, their indifference to the rights of the child, their accusations of totalitarianism and their superiority over those who would like to help the child' </span><span style="color: black;">- please take the time to go and read some of those comments to see how ridiculous that statement is - She then declared that having hardly taken any notice of home education before, she had now <span style="color: purple;">immersed [herself] in the topic</span> - two points here, firstly if she had hardly taken any notice of it before, why did she consider herself to be in a fit position to make the comments she did about it on her blog in the first place? and secondly, 'Oh joy!'</span><br />
She went on to say that <span style="color: purple;">'registration is to be welcomed, together with the parent's statement of plans for the child's education' </span><span style="color: black;">but that she didn't think the Bill went far enough in ensuring those things would happen (!) and that the Bill must '<span style="color: purple;">permit the child to be seen alone by an inspector</span>.', and then came out with this, which I found quite disturbing</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: purple;">'Article 2 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights also grants the right to education while respecting the rights of parents to have their children educated in accordance with their views. The European Court has held that this, of necessity, implies state regulation of the education that the child receives. The court held that Germany was entitled to ban home education. It is the duty of home-educating parents to secure for their children the education pledged in international treaties; the parents do not have stand-alone rights to determine that education in any way that they wish without state regulation.'</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;">(Incidentally this is not the only time she refers to Germany's policy on home education.) Then came her concerns about the lack of guarantees for home educated children to receive a suitable education, her concerns about 'migrant children' not being given the opportunity to learn English, her concerns that some people have <span style="color: purple;">'a belief that children can just learn autonomously without being taught' </span><span style="color: black;">and her wonder at</span> <span style="color: purple;">'how this worked with, say, physics, and fear that those children are being experimented on in a way that may blight their only chance in a lifetime to be presented with the knowledge and life skills that they will need.'</span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;">She claimed that none of the home educators who had commented on her blog had mentioned the welfare of the child, and quite bizarrely (I thought) that </span><span style="color: purple;">'t</span><span style="color: purple;">hey seemed overwhelmingly middle class' </span><span style="color: black;">(still not sure what that was about??) And that she was worried by the level of resentment shown in the comments (hmm...I wonder why that would be?)</span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: black;"><span style="color: black;">She then managed to squeeze in a completely irrelevant comment about forced marriage, before going on to say that she did not think that the Bill went far enough in some of it's recommendations (and I have to reproduce this bit in it's entirety because it is so unbelievable)...</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: purple;">'It is inadequate that the local authority will be able to see the child only once a year. I should have thought that it would be better-albeit expensive, I appreciate-to produce the child every quarter or six months. The child should have the right to talk alone to the inspector. Fear of strangers is no excuse; or rather that is the very excuse that has been used when there have been failures to meet a child's needs which could have been avoided, had that child been produced. A child cannot go through youth without meeting doctors, dentists, repair men and so on. Two weeks' notice of a visit by the inspectors in the Bill is possibly too long; one week should be adequate, and in cases of concern there ought to be the right to visit without warning. Where a parent appeals against refusal to register, the child should be sent to school at once and not allowed to continue at home, pending appeal.</span><br />
<span style="color: purple;">In sum, our registration system will be weaker than that of most countries. Most US states have a more structured system, and opting out is forbidden in Germany. Your Lordships should not be deterred by the strong wording of the home education lobbyists. There needs to be a way for the home-educated child to be seen and heard, for samples of his or her work to be produced and for rigorous tracking of existence and outcome. I therefore strongly support this part of the Bill.'</span><br />
<br />
There is an excellent blogpost from Lou <a href="http://loubeeloo-holistichumanism.blogspot.com/2010/03/those-who-cantdeech.html">here</a> on Deech, and Dave's response to what she had to say is <a href="http://underwateracademy.blogspot.com/2010/03/to-respond-more-fully-to-points-raised.html">here</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-49824624433211789672010-03-07T06:45:00.000-08:002010-03-07T13:28:32.107-08:00Why DON'T they like us?Several of my facebook friends have become fans recently of <a href="http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/pages/why-are-people-so-against-people-home-educating/355357889832?v=wall&ref=nf">this page</a>. At the time of writing this post I was not aware of its origins, but have since found out that it has been set up by a thirteen year old who really cant work out why people are so against her perfectly legal and legitimate choice to come out of school - it got me thinking - Why <strong>are</strong> people so against people home educating? And who are these 'people'? <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
I had never realised quite how many people had a problem with home education until the CSF Bill began it's farcical journey through Parliament. People from the government, people from local education authorities, people from children's charities, members of parliament, lords and baronesses, journalists and reporters. And then there are the other people, the people in the street people, the parent people, the commentors on blog posts and newspaper articles people, the neighbours people...the friends people...the family people....<br />
<br />
Now I think when it comes to Government and MPs and Peers etc, there are probably all sorts of hidden agendas for their disapproval of us. Perhaps it simply boils down to the fact that we make their 'approved' system of education look bad. Perhaps it is a control thing. Perhaps it is a cover-our-backs-at-all-costs fear thing.<br />
And as for the media - I guess that comes down to whatever sells the paper, get the comments, grabs the attention.<br />
Some of it comes down to misinformation and a lack of knowledge and understanding - although in these cases, why people think they have the right or the authority, to pass comment on things they have little or no knowledge of, is beyond me.<br />
But whatever their reasons, I think it is important that we keep trying to work out what they are, because even if we do defeat this now, unless we can work out <strong>why</strong> they want to change us and address those issues, they <strong>will</strong> keep on wanting to change us.<br />
<br />
Usually, I don't give a stuff about what people think of me or what I do with my life unless it directly affects them too. I try to avoid analysing the reasons behind their disapproval of me, on the grounds that it's probably more of a problem for them than it is for me anyway! But in this instance, this is a problem for us and for all home educators in this country, because in this instance, opinions are being made to count, and they are counting against us. <br />
<br />
How many of my friends and family actually signed <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">this petition</a> when I asked them too? Sadly only a few - although I am very grateful to those who did. <br />
How many of those who <strong>didn't</strong> sign, would give me a reason for not doing so? <strong>None</strong>. Not one. <br />
Why is it that we have not been able to get the twenty thousand plus signatures on this petition that we really need for the government to take notice? Why are people so against home educators?<br />
<br />
Do people perhaps view my decision to home educate as some sort of judgement or comment on their decision not to? If so, why? - I do not view their decision to send their children to school as a judgement on my decision not to do that.<br />
Do people perhaps still believe that we are all insular religious nutjobs who hide our children away, wrap them up in cotton wool and indoctrinate them with our own misguided beliefs? If so, why? Just flicking through some of the blogs below shows that there is a wealth of evidence to the contrary.<br />
Do people perhaps believe that our children are genuinely more at risk than children in school? If so, why? I find this one particularly hard to comprehend given the amount of evidence to the contrary that has been laid out for all to see.<br />
Or perhaps it is not that people <strong>are</strong> 'against' other people home educating at all. Perhaps it is just that they really couldn't care less what happens to us, because they are not 'us'. If so, why? When did this become a 'them and us' thing?<br />
<br />
I don't think I have managed to answer anything really with this post. I still don't know why people are against us home educating, but what I do know is that we will keep on fighting any misrepresentations of home education by the Government and the media, and we will keep trying to find ways of changing opinion. It seems sometimes that so much (re)education is needed in so many areas, when all any of us really want to be doing is getting on with educating our own children, but I can still see nothing else for it at the moment but to keep on keeping on.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-32824043238431597622010-02-25T14:22:00.000-08:002010-03-07T07:10:35.884-08:00Khyra Ishaq - let her rest in peaceI spent much of this morning being denied the right by moderators to comment on <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article7040152.ece">this article</a><br />
<a name='more'></a> and trying to do something to set the record straight about the "small number of extreme cases, where home-educated children had suffered harm because concerns were not picked up." that the Badman review supposedly found.<br />
You can't read my comment there (it has actually gone through now slightly edited), but you can read it<a href="http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=339083039752"> here</a> or a fuller version of some of the facts <a href="http://meandchis.blogspot.com/2009/12/not-child-protection-issue.html">here </a><br />
<br />
This evening, I came home to find my facebook page absolutely full of links to, and outrage about, the government and media responses to the Khrya Ishaq case. <br />
I have not read them all. I have seen enough, and quite simply cannot read anymore.<br />
<br />
Khyra Ishaq was not home educated.<br />
Khyra Ishaq WAS removed from her school by her mother, but not formally deregistered, and was missing from school for a considerable amount of time. Her teachers were concerned about her. They tried to visit her themselves. They made her known to Social Services. <br />
SOCIAL SERVICES FAILED TO PROTECT HER EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS KNOWN TO THEM. <br />
Khyra Ishaq WAS known to Educational Welfare Officers. <br />
THE LEA FAILED TO PROTECT HER EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS KNOWN TO THEM.<br />
Khyra Ishaq's teachers made their concerns known to the police.<br />
THE POLICE FAILED TO PROTECT HER EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS KNOWN TO THEM.<br />
Khyra Ishaq's neighbours had concerns about her welfare which they failed to report.<br />
HER NEIGHBOURS FAILED TO PROTECT HER.<br />
<br />
KHYRA ISHAQ's MOTHER FAILED HER<br />
<br />
Current Home Education legislation did NOT fail to protect her, so please ask yourselves why the government and the media are trying to convince you that this is the case. Why <a href="http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/news/index.cfm?event=news.item&id=secretary_of_states_response_to_verdicts_in_the_kyra_ishaq_case">this man</a> thinks that it is acceptable to use the horrific and tragically short life, and death, of this poor child, as a pawn in his political game...<br />
<br />
Ed Balls says...<br />
<br />
"The trial has demonstrated, and statements today from the police confirm, that home education was a factor in this case. It shows why we do need a system in place to make sure that when children are home educated or removed from school, they not only get a good education but are safe. That is why I asked Graham Badman to review home education and home educated children’s safety and welfare.<br />
<br />
I am now taking forward Graham Badman’s recommendations that every local authority should have access to any home educating family and that all home educating parents must register with the local authority. We will do all we can to ensure the safety of children, in Birmingham and elsewhere, including using statutory powers where it is right to do so."<br />
<br />
How was home education a factor in this case when for at least three months this child was not deregistered from school, but was missing from education, when teachers AT HER SCHOOL had reported their concerns to Social Services and the Police, when educational social workers made visits to the home? How could the proposed changes to home education legislation possibly have made any difference to this child who <strong>was already known</strong> to so many agencies?<br />
<br />
The supposedly impartial and objective BBC has managed to come up with the most disgracefully unbalanced, insensitive and biased report possible on this case, read it <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8532779.stm">here</a> if you haven't already, and then complain, <strong>LOUDLY </strong>and<strong> clearly,</strong> like <a href="http://every-child-matters.blogspot.com/2010/02/my-complaint-to-bbc.html">these</a> <a href="http://smatthan.blogspot.com/2010/02/complaint-to-bbc.html">people</a> (and many more), <a href="http://freedomineducationunderthreat.blogspot.com/2010/02/my-bbc-complaint.html">here,</a> <a href="http://maire-staffordshire.blogspot.com/2010/02/my-complaint-to-bbc.html">here</a>, <a href="http://www.swsurrey-home-ed.co.uk/wordpress/2010/02/25/bbc-balls-broadcasting-corp/">here</a>, <a href="http://muddybarefeet.blogspot.com/2010/02/complaint-to-bbc.html">here</a>, <a href="http://www.facebook.com/notes/lou-sherwood/bbc-my-complaint-about-the-use-of-the-tragic-khyra-ishaq-case-as-a-propagandist-/328324894126">here</a>,<a href="http://ciarang.com/posts/complaining-to-the-bbc"> here</a>, <a href="http://www.renegadeparent.net/post/Khyra-Ishaq.aspx">here</a> and <a href="http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150104168720107&id=1190930886&ref=nf">here</a>. And if you are unsure how to complain - <a href="http://unhallowedground.blogspot.com/2010/02/complaining-to-bbc.html">click here</a><br />
<br />
Down, but not out....Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-91312265527436445272010-02-10T08:57:00.000-08:002010-02-19T13:31:01.336-08:00Speechless (I wish they were) :(I am absolutely gutted on reading these two blog posts this evening, can't find words, but here are the links, <br />
<a name='more'></a>this one is from Lord Soley in response to the fact that not enough people agreed with his previous post, so he feels the need to say it again in case we just didn't hear him........couldn't be that people didn't agrere with him because he was wrong could it?<br />
<a href="http://lordsoftheblog.net/2010/02/10/home-education-round-two/">http://lordsoftheblog.net/2010/02/10/home-education-round-two/</a><br />
<br />
and this is Baroness Deech's response<br />
<br />
<a href="http://lordsoftheblog.net/2010/02/10/schoolgirls-ii/">http://lordsoftheblog.net/2010/02/10/schoolgirls-ii/</a><br />
<br />
I made add more words to this <a href="http://meandchis.blogspot.com/2010/02/lords-bleep-bleep-bleep-ing.html">later</a>, but right now I just can't.....Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-26254628256777184342010-02-06T04:13:00.000-08:002010-02-19T13:30:32.122-08:00Make More Noise!...........PLEASE!!!!This is Caroline Flint MP (Labour) talking at the committee meeting on Thursday.<br />
<a name='more'></a> There were lots of important points raised at this meeting, and lots of important points ignored, but I wanted to focus on Caroline Flint because she, and other gutless Labour MPs like her are a problem, and a BIG problem at that.<br />
(you can read the rest of the committee meeting transcript <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmpublic/childsch/100204/pm/100204s01.htm">here</a>)<br />
<br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"Caroline Flint: I will try to keep my comments brief because I know that the hon. Member for Beverley and Holderness has done a lot of work in this area and wishes to speak.</span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">When I started to consider this part of the Bill, I wondered why we should not know the position of all our children who, in any other circumstances, would be in our state education system. However, after reading the documentation that was sent to us and listening to the concerns of one of my constituents, I now have some doubts. Gordon Whitehead has brought jobs into Doncaster. He supports learning and opportunities for young people, and wants to offer apprenticeships and opportunities in IT through his company. However, he has huge concerns for his own home-educated children because of what the propositions in the Bill will mean for him and other families who home educate."</span></em><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Good start huh? She getting it. She's been listening to people and is not afraid to stand up and say her opinin has changed, she might have been wrong in her initial assumptions.</span><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"I do not want to repeat everything that the hon. Member for Yeovil said, but I have some concerns about a process through which, for understandable reasons, there is a desire to know that if children are not in school, they are being home educated. Needing to know that information has turned this proposal into something that is bureaucratic and overburdening to families and local authorities. Those authorities are not confident that they can carry out the Government’s ask on this matter.</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">To echo the hon. Gentleman, I have read the statement from the Government about what is not expected of parents who home educate. However, although earlier paragraphs say that parents need to produce only two pages on what they provide, we then find that they will be asked to explain their philosophy as well as other things. I find that very confusing. We are able to read all this documentation and to hear from witnesses, but I wonder how such information will be related to local government officers on the ground."</span></em><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Still good. She finds her party's proposals confusing, she's looked at them, analysed them, she can see it just won't work. It doesn't add up.</span><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"In submissions provided by parents who home educate, we have found out about—I say straight away that I am sure that this does not represent all local government officers—individuals giving personal rather than objective points of view when they go into the homes of people who home educate. It might not be my personal desire to educate my children a certain way, but I recall one example of a local government officer referring in a report to incense being burned in the home. The family quite rightly questioned the report, saying, “What has that got to do with anything? People use fresheners in their homes all the time.” To be honest, however, there was in that case perhaps implied criticism that the family were rather “brown rice and sandals” and hippy-ish, and the very mention of incense being burned conveyed an approach with which the local government officer did not agree."</span></em><br />
<br />
Still good. She has read the submissions from the people this will actually affect. She has listened. She understands the problem of being inspected subjectively.<br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"The Committee was provided with case studies of child protection, some of which I found rather wanting. There was an example of a woman in Gloucestershire—I think she was a foster mother—who was prosecuted for cruelty to children. If I have understood it correctly, the education services had annual contact to monitor the education at home. Having visited that home on an annual basis, the education service came to the conclusion that things were generally satisfactory and that no child protection concerns were noted, although perhaps that says something about whether the service was looking Column number: 494correctly. However, I could not see how anything in the Bill’s proposals would have made any difference in that case.</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">Another example was of a young person who sadly died. The serious case review stated categorically that the mother</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">“complied with all statutory requirements in relation to children in elective home education. She co-operated with visits from the London Borough of Enfield Education Department”</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">twice in one year. The following year, it was identified that</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">“The visiting officer had no concerns about the family or their circumstances, and was satisfied”.</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">What seems to have come out of those various examples linked to child protection is that, even in such circumstances, those on the ground have responded to the Government by saying, “We need something bigger. We need something more overarching to deal with these issues across the piece.”"</span></em><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Still good. She knows the whole child protection angle was nonsense. She knows that these prposals would not have made a blind it of difference to those tragic, but nothing to do with home education, cases.</span><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"I am not sure whether the Bill strikes the right balance. Finding a way through this matter is important, as is the language used. We have heard valid points about whether something is seen as a registration or an application.</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">The law is also called into question. We have received numerous submissions highlighting the role of the local authority in providing those services that it is required to provide, including such things as the national curriculum, child protection and Every Child Matters. However, whether we like it or not, as far as I understand it, the law is different when it comes to provision provided by parents. The locus for the local authority in that case is very different, and I wonder whether—presumably the legal opinion in my hon. Friend the Minister’s Department has given views on this—it might be open to legal challenge by other quarters in relation to the state’s role in providing education, and the ways in which it expects education to be provided when parents choose to do that.</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">I do not think we will resolve the matter today, but I hope that my hon. Friend will show a willingness to listen—I am sure she will—and engage in trying to find a better way forward. Another approach might be to make an offer that opens up dialogue between those in the community who home educate and local authorities. If there was money available to do that—money seems to be available to train local authority officers to inspect and understand what they need to inspect—it would be better used when linked to some sort of notification system with better co-operation."</span></em><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Still good. She doesn't think it can be resolved today. She wants to see another, better, way forward.</span><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"During the evidence sessions—I think that Mr. Badman referred to this—we heard positive examples of forums involving home educators that already worked with a local authority. I do not want anyone to misinterpret this, but some of those in the home-educating community might be better gatekeepers for information about possible legitimate concerns."</span></em><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Still good. She understands that the people best placed to be talking about home education, are home educators.</span><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"Mr. Stuart: The right hon. Lady is giving a thoughtful speech. She is sending a much-needed message from this place that the voices of home educators have at least been listened to, because many of them feel that Members are deaf to what they say. Her fellow Labour members of the Select Committee came to precisely the same conclusion about improving the provision—that was Badman’s No. 1 identified need—and then seeing what happens. We should work on a voluntary basis with families before imposing such draconian legislation. If there was a need, and if there was no other way of tackling it, civil liberties and other issues could be put aside. Initially, however, the offer should be to work with families. I hope that the right hon. Lady’s words will influence the Minister.</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">Caroline Flint: I believe that my hon. Friend the Minister and the Government want to take aspects of what Mr. Badman has looked at, and what the Select Committee has said, and try to make them work. My worry for the Government is that, for a number of different reasons, there has been a breakdown in confidence and trust on the issue. I am therefore worried about whether we will be able to bring various parties together to discuss the issue productively. I think that the Government have the best intentions. Part of the challenge, to be fair to them, arises because they are being lobbied by a number of other organisations and individuals to do something about the matter, but this is about getting the balance right. We have heard about taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut, but there are different ways to resolve the issue and address the problems that have caused concern."</span></em><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Still good. "there are different ways to resolve the issue".</span><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">"Mr. Gibb: I take the point that the Government are being lobbied—I am sure that that is one of the burdens of office—but the Badman report’s original terms of reference imply that the Government were originally being lobbied to look into safeguarding, rather than the education issues. It now seems that the issue has been turned on its head and that the education issue is the Government’s focus. Who is lobbying the Government from that angle?</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">Caroline Flint: I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister will answer that question. There is an issue about how safeguarding and education have somehow merged into each other. Part of the problem might be that some of the civil servants are trying to find a way to argue the issue out by bringing that into the debate. I do not know the answer.</span></em><br />
<em><br />
<span style="color: blue;"></span></em><br />
<em><span style="color: blue;">There must be a way forward that can bring the relevant communities together, whether they are parents, local government or the Department. I hope that we can find a way forward, because I am concerned that we will otherwise end up with something that cannot be delivered on the ground and that will create division when people should be coming together, and I am sure that that is not what this Committee or the House want to achieve.""</span></em><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Still good you think? This is a Labour MP telling the committee that she thinks her party has got it wrong, that they need to find a different way forward, that this will not work....</span><br />
<br />
This is Caroline Flint MP (Labour) voting with her Party to keep everything in the Bill just the way it is...<br />
<br />
NOES<br />
<br />
Coaker, Mr. Vernon<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Flint, rh Caroline</span><br />
Johnson, Ms Diana R.<br />
Linton, Martin<br />
McCarthy, Kerry<br />
Prentice, Bridget<br />
Purchase, Mr. Ken<br />
Waltho, Lynda<br />
<br />
and again...<br />
<br />
Division No. 14]<br />
<br />
AYES<br />
Coaker, Mr. Vernon<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Flint, rh Caroline</span><br />
Johnson, Ms Diana R.<br />
Linton, Martin<br />
McCarthy, Kerry<br />
Prentice, Bridget<br />
Purchase, Mr. Ken<br />
Waltho, Lynda<br />
<br />
and again...<br />
<br />
NOES<br />
<br />
Coaker, Mr. Vernon<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Flint, rh Caroline</span><br />
Johnson, Ms Diana R.<br />
Linton, Martin<br />
McCarthy, Kerry<br />
Prentice, Bridget<br />
Purchase, Mr. Ken<br />
Waltho, Lynda<br />
<br />
and again...<br />
<br />
Division No. 16]<br />
<br />
AYES<br />
Coaker, Mr. Vernon<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Flint, rh Caroline</span><br />
Johnson, Ms Diana R.<br />
Linton, Martin<br />
McCarthy, Kerry<br />
Prentice, Bridget<br />
Purchase, Mr. Ken<br />
Waltho, Lynda<br />
We cannot rely on common sense to prevail. We cannot rely on justice to prevail. We cannot rely on other people having the guts to stand up for what they believe in. But <strong>we</strong> must. We must keep making noise. If you are one of those people who thought that a law this awful would never get passed, IT IS UP TO ITS THIRD READING <strong>WITHOUT</strong> AMENDMENTS!!!<br />
<br />
Sign <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">this petition</a>. Share <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">this petition</a>. Make your MP aware of <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">this petition</a>. Write to a Lord.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-70198973490923011942010-01-24T03:20:00.000-08:002010-01-24T03:20:39.872-08:00The truth...is <a href="http://tinyurl.com/HEtruth">here</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-14925141529811020702010-01-13T00:15:00.000-08:002010-01-13T00:15:40.368-08:00Picking out the positivesYesterday was quite a grey day, in more ways than one. The brilliant blue, or snow-laden white, skies that we have become accustomed to seeing, were replaced with drizzly grey ones, and what with the consultation sham, and all the analysis of the second reading of the CSF Bill in parliament on Monday, things took on a less than rosy hue whatever coloured glasses you choose to wear. But it is not <strong>all</strong> doom and gloom, and I think it is important to recognise some the many positive statements made both in defence of home education, and in criticism of the Bill, in parliament on Monday. So here are a few I picked out from the transcript of proceedings.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Please note though, that just because I have quoted from a particular MP, doesn't mean that I agree with everything they had to say on the subject!<br />
Nor am I under any illusions that we don't still have difficult and worrying times ahead, but I am pleased that some of them are 'getting it', and that some others are at least trying to.<br />
<br />
"... it is not for us to second-guess the decisions made by parents. Many of those who sacrifice not only earnings but time make a commitment of love towards their children in order to home educate them, and that should be celebrated and applauded, not denigrated and undermined." Michael Gove MP<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"Before attending to home education, the Government must first deal with those already in the system who do not achieve as they should...The Bill is directed at the wrong children in the wrong fashion." Andrew Turner MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"I am sure that changes will be made to the current proposals in Committee-I sincerely hope so, as there is no grave concern about the standard of home education: quite the reverse." Elfyn Llwyd MP (Plaid Cymru)</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"he [Balls] made it absolutely clear that home educators provide education at home for a variety of reasons. Does he not see that the Badman report effectively takes a one-size-fits-all approach, which is directly opposed to the fact that there is a whole variety of different reasons why home educators keep their children at home and educate them there?" Mark Field MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"...the level at which the Government aim to monitor parent-child relationships is tantamount to saying that a parent willing to spend time with their child is somehow in the wrong. Such intrusiveness into parents' lives is bad enough, but the detrimental effects on children's education and well-being are even more dangerous." Andrew Turner MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"The rights of families should be respected, and I am not convinced that they are being respected by the proposals being introduced." Michael Gove MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"It has always been the duty of parents, not the state, to educate their children, and they may choose to do so through school or otherwise. That historic settlement will be turned on its head by the Bill, which tears from parents and gives to the state the decision as to how a child is to be educated." Graham Stuart MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"..it is very regrettable that education and safeguarding have become so mixed up in the Badman report. An assumption that local authority inspectors should have to check whether all home educators meet safeguarding requirements is inappropriate...The intrusiveness in that part of the Bill is quite extraordinary." David Laws MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"There has been a lot of concern about the fact that the consultation on the Badman proposals was not published before the Bill was published...the response to that consultation was [only] published yesterday. That hardly helps to inform our deliberations too well today, except for those who are particularly astute." Graham Stuart MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"The numbers were 230 in favour, 4,497 against and 106 unsure, yet Ministers keep making out that it is a minority of people who are opposed. It is not a minority" Graham Stuart MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"I am disappointed by the fact that we seem to be rushing through the legislation. The Badman report was rushed, too...[The Committee] recognised that the Badman report had not been handled in quite the same way as many other Government reports. We are rushing through this legislation, and we need to stop and look again" Kate Hoey MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"A system is being set up, supposedly for the benefit of home-educated children and their families, to create, according to Ministers, a co-operative atmosphere, yet that system is being forced on to families, practically none of whom wants it. Ministers should ask themselves whether they want to bring such help to fam...ilies who are so adamant that they do not want to receive it." Graham Stuart MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"The Bill is full of guarantees, but anyone who searches through it for such guarantees will find that there are none." Graham Stuart MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"...the administrative convenience of the local authority is to be put ahead of the interests of the child. That is what is in the Bill." Graham Stuart MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"[I] find it bizarre that this Bill, unlike any piece of legislation to deal with children going back to 1989, fails to make the interests of the child paramount in any consideration. Instead, the Bill considers any administrative failures on the part of parents as being an open and shut case for the revocation of home... education, regardless of the interests of the child, and that is simply wrong." Graham Stuart MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"this is not about safeguarding or even about child protection; this is about the Secretary of State being able to say that an individual home educating parent is not providing an education that he deems appropriate and therefore they should not have the right to educate that child at home." Michael Gove MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"... there are often positive reasons for parents choosing to educate their children at home? These decisions are not necessarily a reflection on the schools or the local education authority, so the notion that simply improving the LEA or the schools will dissipate the demand for home education is entirely wrong. Some parents home educate for very positive reasons." Mark Field MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"I deeply regret the way statistics have been used to suggest somehow that children are intrinsically at greater risk if they are being home educated; I believe I am right in saying that not a single home-educated child has [been] taken into care as a result of a child protection plan, yet there are those who have sedu...lously spread the myth that somehow children are at greater risk through being home educated." Michael Gove MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"this [home education] is a basic human right that every parent should have, and I feel the Bill erodes that right," Michael Gove MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"I am deeply concerned about the additional bureaucratic burden that will now potentially be placed on thousands of our fellow citizens whose only crime is to want to devote themselves as fully as possible to their children's education" Michael Gove MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"He cannot be surprised if the Liberal Democrats indicate that we do not want many of those proposals to go through in a half-baked or half-scrutinised way before the general election that we know the Government are having to rush this Bill through before." David Laws MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"[We]have serious concerns about the amount of time that will be available to debate the Bill. When one picks the Bill up, it does not look to be of the size and scale of the last education Act... but it deals with extraordinarily important and sensitive issues, and the debate that we will need to have on some of those... issues will be considerable, but we will be trying to do that in only two weeks." David Laws MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"That [registration requirements in particular regarding 'approach to education'] is very dangerous, because we are now saying that we actually want to interfere in how children are educated at home. If we believe that families have first responsibility for such education, we have to allow them it." Kate Hoey MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"I hope that the Government will still look and listen and, in Committee, change the legislation to make it much more acceptable to all those home educators who do a very fine job." Kate Hoey MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"In reality, what starts out as light-touch, particularly when a local authority does not necessarily operate in the best possible way, can easily turn into something more than that-something that becomes another burden and is about controlling and changing what home educating parents do." Kate Hoey MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"As many Members on both sides of the House have acknowledged, education is primarily a parent's responsibility, not that of the Government...I argue that home educators understand the responsibility placed on them. They understand that the responsibility for a child's schooling falls on nobody but the parents." Andrew Turner MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"There are a number of reasons for home education, and it clearly is not one homogenous entity, which makes a heavy-handed and rushed approach to legislating seem singularly inappropriate." Annette Brooke MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"Nothing should be done to prevent children from flourishing and learning in the environment best suited to them, in school or out." Andrew Turner MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"I must confess that I find the Bill, and particularly the provisions for the regulation of home schooling, deeply troubling." Andrew Turner MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"I was asked recently what plans the Welsh Assembly might have to use the new powers granted in the Bill. They will relate to England only... I believe that there will be an in-depth consultation and that Badman will not be put into effect, at least in that manner, in Wales." Elfyn Llwyd MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"Any Government must guard the sacred right of parents to educate their children, while vigorously tightening the current system when it comes to child welfare... the Government should look to their own ability to fulfil the Every Child Matters objectives, rather than continue to pursue those who put their faith, time ...and passion into home education. I believe that these proposals should be firmly rejected." Mark Field MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"Increased intervention makes little financial sense and has the potential to divert resources from truly vulnerable children. It also further infringes the rights of parents to make what they believe are the right decisions for their children. Current legislation is perfectly adequate but all too often poorly understood." Mark Field MP</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">"Home educators vigorously reject the attempts by the Government to mix concerns about child welfare into any review of home education, and I believe that they are right...we must be clear: local authorities already have powers to get involved in a family when there are concerns about abuse." Mark Field MP</span><br />
<br />
You can read the transcript for yourself <a href="http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200910/cmhansrd/cm100111/debtext/100111-0006.htm#1001119000001">here</a> - some of the speeches I could have quoted from much more, Those of Mark Field, Andrew Turner and Graham Stuart, I feel are particularly worthy of note.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-25747784068166234732010-01-09T03:03:00.000-08:002010-01-09T03:03:40.755-08:00Just say NO!Lib dems say NO. Former Children's Laureate says NO. OBE's say NO. Lord Lucas says NO. Leading academics say NO. Educationalists say NO. Psychologists say NO. Teachers say NO. Parents say NO... <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">Here's</a> one easy way that you can say NO too to proposals in the CSF Bill and protect your family's future... <a name='more'></a><br />
If you said you would sign this and haven't yet, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do it now. We really need as many people as possible to sign it THIS WEEKEND. If you have signed it PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE check that you clicked on the link in your confirmation email from number 10. If you don't know what I'm talking about - Where have you been for the past few months!?!......HUGE thank you again to anyone who has already signed it! :)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-27003461465674887422010-01-06T01:54:00.000-08:002010-01-06T01:55:13.658-08:00Update on authorsAnne Fine OBE (Children's Laureate 2001/2003) has signed both the e-petition amd the open letter :)))<br />
John Harris -<br />
<a name='more'></a> professional storyteller and children's author - has signed the open letter<br />
Michael Lawrence was supportive on civil rights grounds but unwilling to sign anything that required his address.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-64732639918591651252010-01-03T05:16:00.000-08:002010-01-04T04:13:41.980-08:00Email to children's authorsI noticed today that there is a Geraldine McCaughrean on the list of signatures on the e-petition and it sparked the idea to approach other UK children's authors for their support.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
This is the email I sent out today to 31 (or 33!) authors (mostly via agents unfortunately, so I don't know how soon they will reach their intended destination), and the list of those it has been sent to. If you can think of anyone else please feel free to use the letter, or to make suggestions :)<br />
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
THE LETTER - subject: End of educational freedom? Please read and help if you can...<br />
<br />
<strong>Important information affecting the lives and educational freedom of many of your readers - please take the time to read and help in any way that you can. Thankyou.</strong><br />
<br />
<br />
Dear (Children's author)<br />
<br />
I don't know if you are aware of the new Children's, Schools and Families Bill which is currently making it's way through UK parliament. The second reading of this Bill will take place on January 11th and has huge implications for family life in the UK, and for civil and parental responsibilties and rights.<br />
<br />
The Bill contains proposals which will seriously threaten Home Education in the UK, and are potentially damaging to the lives of thousands of home educated children and their families.<br />
<br />
There are many diverse reasons why parents choose to home educate their children, but for many children, home education is an absolute lifeline;<br />
<br />
Each week: 450,000 children are bullied in school <br />
Each year: more than 360,000 children injured in schools<br />
Each year: at least 16 children commit suicide as a result of school bullying<br />
Each year: an estimated 1 million children truant<br />
Each year: more than 1 in 6 children leave school unable to read, write or add up<br />
(<a href="http://ahed.pbworks.com/Anomaly-Figures">http://ahed.pbworks.com/Anomaly-Figures</a>)<br />
<br />
One size really does not fit all.<br />
<br />
Despite the government's recent U-turn on other matters concerning CRB checks, in direct response to these proposals, OFSTED have recommended that home educating parents be CRB checked before being given permission to look after their OWN children - this is all without the need for any evidence, or even suspicion, of wrongdoing. And these proposals will not just affect the home educating community, they open the door for dramatic changes to be made to the lives of ALL children and families in the UK. These proposals turn on its head the premise that it is parents who have the primary responsibility for the welfare, education and upbringing of their children, and hands this responsibility to the state instead.<br />
They make a mockery of the 'innocent until proven guilty' theory that justice in this country is supposedly founded on. <br />
<br />
Please take the time to read this open letter to The Guardian and The Times, and consider signing it.(before the 8th January)<br />
<br />
http://bhhe.wordpress.com/diversity/<br />
<br />
and also to sign this urgent petition before the second reading of this Bill on January the 11th.<br />
<br />
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/<br />
<br />
<br />
Thankyou for taking the time to read this.<br />
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
LIST OF AUTHORS THIS HAS BEEN SENT TO<br />
Philip Ardagh<br />
Terry Deary<br />
Sally Grindley<br />
Michael Lawrence<br />
Chris d'Lacey<br />
Jean Ure<br />
Diane Wynne Jones<br />
Michael Rosen<br />
James Carter<br />
Terry Pratchett<br />
Julia Donaldson<br />
Adele Geras<br />
Quentin Blake<br />
David Almond<br />
Philip Pullman<br />
Anne Fine<br />
Roger McGough<br />
Michael Morpurgo<br />
Eric Carle<br />
Francesca Simon<br />
Jeanette Winterson<br />
Benjamin Zephaniah<br />
Cressida Cowell<br />
Jacqueline Wilson<br />
Babette Cole<br />
J K Rowling<br />
John Harris (story teller)<br />
Malorie Blackman<br />
Roderick Gordon and Brian Williams<br />
Zizou CorderUnknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-69350540651501591342010-01-01T06:14:00.000-08:002010-01-01T08:32:04.536-08:00Open letter to The Guardian and The Times (from BHHE website)From <a href="http://bhhe.wordpress.com/diversity/">the BHHE website</a><br />
<br />
Diversity in Education is precious in a democracy<br />
This is an open letter to The Guardian and The Times, intended for publication on January 11th 2010, which is the date of the second reading of the Children, Schools and Families Bill in the House of Commons.<br />
If you agree with the letter, please complete the <a href="http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=bhhe.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fspreadsheets.google.com%2Fviewform%3Fformkey%3DdDQxZXlIblZ1NXdLWkZoQUFXdTg3Vmc6MA">signature form</a> before January 8th 2010 <br />
<a name='more'></a>to add your name as a signatory.<br />
If you are a member of a home educating family, please contact people outside the home education community and ask them to add their signatures to yours, so that the list of signatories will reflect the widespread opposition to Schedule 1, from people in all walks of life.<br />
<br />
The letter<br />
We believe that Schedule 1 of the Children Schools and Families Bill represents an unacceptable imposition of state control over families. Although it is aimed at children educated outside the school system, it has implications for all families.<br />
Most parents would not make home-based education their first choice; but any family might need it if school seriously failed their child. Currently, this choice is lawfully available to all parents. If enacted, the Bill would – for the first time – transfer responsibility for a child’s education from the parents to the state. We believe this is a matter which should be of great concern to everyone.<br />
A change in the law is unnecessary. Parents are already required by law to provide an education suitable to the age, aptitude and ability of their children, and to any special educational needs they may have. Local authorities already have the power to take action if parents do not do this.<br />
Evidence indicates that home education is highly effective. Many home educating families use child-led educational methods which lie outside the prevailing educational paradigm. Diversity in education is precious in a democracy, and we need the law to protect it, and to protect the best interests of each individual child.<br />
The interests of children are strikingly absent from Schedule 1, which is concerned mainly with setting up a bureaucratic system administered by local authorities. Local authorities would be given the power to deny parents permission to home educate, at any time, unless parents adapt their educational approach to fit in with the requirements of the system. The resulting insecurity would be damaging to many children, especially those with special educational needs.<br />
Schedule 1 directly contravenes two central principles of the Government’s own Children’s Plan: that families bring up children, not governments; and that services need to be shaped by and responsive to children, young people and families, not designed around professional boundaries.<br />
Given the controversy surrounding this section of the Bill, and the serious criticisms made of it by the Children, Families and Schools Select Committee, we call on the Government to withdraw Schedule 1 of the Bill, and the accompanying clauses.<br />
<br />
Add your name:<br />
To add your name as a signatory, please complete the <a href="http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=bhhe.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fspreadsheets.google.com%2Fviewform%3Fformkey%3DdDQxZXlIblZ1NXdLWkZoQUFXdTg3Vmc6MA">signature form</a> before January 8th 2010<br />
<br />
Further information<br />
<br />
Full list of signatories<br />
<a href="http://bhhe.wordpress.com/open-letter-faq/">FAQ about this letter</a><br />
<a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmbills/008/10008.38-44.html#m01s">Schedule 1 of the CSF Bill</a><br />
<a href="http://www.takebackyourfreedom.co.uk/clause26home.htm">Summary and analysis of Schedule 1</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-28836890604062274452009-12-30T01:24:00.000-08:002010-01-01T08:31:26.335-08:00YES or NO...it really is that simple...Do you think that YOU should be presumed guilty when there is no evidence or suspicion that you are anything but innocent?<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Do you think that the government should divert existing resources away from children who are KNOWN to be at risk, to areas where there are no causes for concern?<br />
<br />
<br />
Do you think that the government is in a better position than YOU to assess YOUR childs needs?<br />
<br />
Do you think YOU should be assumed to be failing your child unless you sign a contract with the government even though there is no evidence or suspicion of failure?<br />
<br />
Do you think that YOU should have to sign a contract with the government and fill out a yearly plan of how you are going to serve your childs needs and face legal action if your plans change, even if those changes are positive ones?<br />
<br />
Do you think that YOU should have a CRB check in order to be allowed to look after YOUR OWN children, or your families or friends children?<br />
<br />
Do you think that a government representative should be allowed to interview YOUR child alone, without you or another trusted adult present, if there is no evidence or even suspicion, of abuse or mistreatment?<br />
<br />
Do you think that a government representative should be allowed to enter your home without your consent without there being any evidence of a crime?<br />
<br />
If you answered 'NO' to these questions and haven't signed <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">this petition</a> yet - Why not?<br />
<br />
Please sign our urgent petition <a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/">http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/</a> - <span style="color: red;">PLEASE</span><span style="color: red;"> REMEMBER TO CLICK ON THE LINK IN THE CONFIRMATION EMAIL YOU WILL RECEIVE FROM NUMBER 10, OR YOUR SIGNATURE WILL NOT BE COUNTED :(</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1153779361442191130.post-21915983359124006792009-12-26T11:06:00.000-08:002010-01-01T08:30:55.530-08:00Home Ed Families e-petition<span style="color: black;">If you haven't already signed this e-petition, please do. It has just gone up to 40th position with just over 3,000 signatures.</span><br />
<a name='more'></a> Another 1,000 will get us into 30th position. If you have a blog please consider putting a link to it in your sidebar. If you facebook, please link to it. If you twitter....do whatever twitterers do with it! Post it on lists/forums etc...<br />
<br />
<br />
This is what the petition says... <br />
<br />
<span style="color: #38761d;">We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to uphold that parents have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of their child, to not undermine parents legitimately fulfilling their fundamental duties, and to assume that the best interests of their child is the basic concern of parents unless there is specific evidence to the contrary</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #38761d;">In particular, the government should ensure :- • No right of access to the family home without evidence of a crime • No right to interview a child alone without evidence of risk of serious harm • No CRB checks or registration for parents to look after their own children, or to informally look after those of their friends, family etc • No licensing / registration / assessment / monitoring of methods by which parents fulfil their duties without evidence that they are failing to do so, and with specific recognition that education “otherwise” than at school is a perfectly legal option to fulfil their duty regarding education • No undermining of parents as being in the best position to determine how to meet their child’s needs, according to their age, ability, aptitude, and any special needs they may have • Greater focus on applying existing resources and procedures to cases of children known to be at risk, rather than dilution of these resources by routinely monitoring whole sections of the community • Compliance with the fundamental presumption of innocence unless there is specific evidence to the contrary</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">To sign this petition please click on<a href="http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/"> this link</a>. You do need to be British citizen to sign, but you do not need to be of voting age - children can sign too as long as they have their own email address. <span style="color: red;">PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU CLICK ON THE LINK IN THE CONFIRMATION EMAIL YOU WILL RECEIVE FROM NUMBER 10, OR YOUR SIGNATURE WILL NOT COUNT</span> :(</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: black;">Please use the comments area of this post to add your thoughts on this petition and why people should sign it... or click on Sally's e-petition blog carnival link in the sidebar and leave some comments there...or both!!..:)</span><br />
thanks, Mandy x<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_c6RSNy2NNWM/SztiCzVARSI/AAAAAAAABL0/Mmkk1PBalVU/s1600-h/blog_for_victory_button.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" ps="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_c6RSNy2NNWM/SztiCzVARSI/AAAAAAAABL0/Mmkk1PBalVU/s200/blog_for_victory_button.JPG" /></a><br />
</div><div align="center"><br />
</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3