SEND Reform Cannot Wait – And Neither Can Fiscal Reality
The system for supporting children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) is widely acknowledged to be broken, with urgent reform required. Repairing it will demand political courage, fiscal discipline, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. Political consensus is rare in today's climate, yet there is unanimous agreement that the current regime needs radical overhaul. Aspects of the system are grotesque, if not cruel, inflicting great distress on children, parents, teachers, and all involved parties. It represents a major concern at every level of the state.
The Arduous and Dehumanising Process
The process for obtaining a legally enforceable Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) can be arduous, often ending in expensive litigation. This is not only absurd but dehumanising for families. Responsibility for running and funding the system is illogically diffused across schools, colleges, local authorities, the NHS, and the Treasury. Moreover, it is becoming increasingly expensive due to rising diagnoses and costs for transportation, care, and education.
According to think tank Policy Exchange, spending on SEND has surged by more than 50% in six years and is projected to reach approximately £18.2 billion annually by 2028. This figure is comparable to the entire NHS drugs budget. This uncapped, legally obliged, non-discretionary spending places intense pressure on local authority budgets, leading many to accumulate large "SEND deficits." Consequently, funds for essential services like roads, refuse collections, and libraries are being crowded out, pushing some councils toward bankruptcy.
The Formidable Challenge Facing Education Secretary
The scale of this crisis has prompted central government to make special grants to councils, with plans to assume total funding responsibility in 2028. However, rationalising budgets alone will not constrain spending. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson faces a formidable challenge. In an era of slow economic growth and public frustration over tax burdens, she must protect children and parents while safeguarding public finances and the wider education system.
Given mounting demands from an ageing population on health and social security, this is one of the most difficult tasks confronting any minister. It is vital for the government's success that welfare spending becomes affordable and commands broad public support. Last year's defeats on welfare reform do not bode well for Ms Phillipson's chances, and the Labour government cannot afford another disastrous U-turn forced by its own backbenchers.
Proceeding with Caution and Consultation
Due to the sensitivities involved and genuine fears of hard-pressed parents, Ms Phillipson is right to proceed cautiously. The crisis is acute, making it crucial to get reform "right first time"—something the government has not always managed. Her starting point is the education white paper, which outlines broad proposals rather than hard-edged legislation. This initial phase serves as a consultation, allowing critical questions to be asked and anxieties aired.
So far, Ms Phillipson has declined to specify whether any child currently receiving support would lose it under the proposals. However, she promises "effective support" and insists that more children will receive help—more quickly and at the point of need. She argues that parents will not have to fight as hard for an EHCP, with the transition taking a decade and more money being spent on SEND.
Ensuring Sustainable Spending Trajectories
This approach does not constitute a radical cost-cutting agenda, nor would that necessarily be desirable given the vulnerability of the children involved. What is essential is bringing the sharply upward trajectory of SEND spending under control and placing it on a politically and economically sustainable path. The same principle applies to the wider social security budget, which includes the state pension and accounts for just over half of the current £334 billion annual total.
In this context, Ms Phillipson and Health Secretary Wes Streeting should revisit the vexed issue of over-diagnosis in certain mental health conditions. This ensures policy rests on an accurate assessment of need and retains taxpayer confidence. Additionally, they might gently examine the feasibility of means-testing certain elements, such as transport costs for pupils sent by local authorities to fee-paying schools, as suggested by some county councils.
The Imperative for Action
At least Ms Phillipson is clear on one point: doing nothing is not an option. The task ahead will be long and arduous. However, if SEND policy is to be fair, humane, and financially sustainable in a world of finite resources, this struggle cannot be avoided. The urgency of reform is matched only by the necessity of fiscal realism, demanding a balanced approach that prioritises both compassion and economic prudence.
