As many of my readers know—we have been trying to stop the recommendations from the Badman Report from becoming law here in the UK.  We are getting dangerously close to this becoming law.

We are a minority group here, and so the government feels they can push these regulations and new laws onto us.

We need more support, to show them that not everyone feels draconian rules are needed, and that home education is not only a moral responsibility parents have, it is a legal right enshrined in UK, European and United Nations Law.  By putting a straight jacket and strict regulations on families, they will destroy the essence of home education—the power to empower our children with the best education, while doing it in a  secure and loving environment that will give them the best possible start in life.

Please help us by signing & passing on this global petition to anyone who can help us.  Children are eligible to sign as well.  Many thanks in advance!!

http://www.gopetition.co.uk/online/29197.html

Please help us keep our freedom to home educate as we, and our children, see fit.

Please support us in petitioning the Prime Minister of Great Britain to reject the recommendations of the Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England by Graham Badman.This report is a totally disproportionate response to a ‘perceived’ problem full of unsubstantiated allegations that home educated children are more at risk of abuse than those at school. This simply is not true, as the report itself makes clear. Enacting the recommendations in this report would establish the state as “parent of first resort”, even though current legislation makes parents responsible for providing a suitable education for their children.

The report proposes to introduce monitoring and registration of home educators. Local officials would be given automatic access to private homes to interview children without their parents or any other trusted adult present. This is outrageous and a serious challenge to civil liberties. Registration may be refused or revoked on safeguarding grounds, though so far it is unclear what these grounds may be and Badman in his report stated that such grounds could be “any other concerns” that the local official had. Under such conditions, “registration” could really mean “permission” especially when home educators come up against inspectors who are anti-home education.

The proposals also introduce the need for the parent to submit an approved 12 month plan and for their child to “exhibit” at the end of the year that their plan has been successfully implemented. This will put an end to autonomous education/unschooling, as any such child-led philosophy would be decimated by having to implement such a structured scheme. This would also seriously curtail the flexibility that many structured home educators enjoy.

Across many countries there seems to be an attempt to undermine home education and to make sure that all children receive the state’s approved version of education, Sweden is moving to ban home education and it is already against the law in Germany.

Please help us stop this happening in England. This is becoming a global problem for home educators/homeschoolers. Let us unite and say with one big voice, “enough is enough!”

Home Education & the Children, Schools & Families Bill  –a letter to the Guardian in support of Home educators

The Tory Party is going to vote: NO

The Lib Dem party is going to vote: NO

I hope our friends and families will all vote: NO

Please sign this petition to protect Home Education here in the UK.  And more importantly—to PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF EVERY FAMILY IN THIS COUNTRY.  We are the parents, not the government.  These rights will be eroded for all families if Clause 26 of the CSF Bill gets passed.

We need everyone’s help to defeat this.  Two of the major political parties see this as madness, we need to convince the Labour party of their own madness.

Everyone can sign—even children.  We need one entry for every family member to get the signature count up to 20,000 by Monday the 11^th of January, when the 2^nd reading of the bill takes place.

PLEASE sign:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Home-ed-families/

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.

In particular, the government should ensure :

1. No right of access to the family home without evidence of a crime
2. No right to interview a child alone without evidence of risk of serious harm
3. No CRB checks or registration for parents to look after their own children, or to informally look after those of their friends, family etc
4. No licensing / registration / assessment / monitoring of methods by which parents fulfill 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 fulfill their duty regarding education
5. 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
6. 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
7. Compliance with the fundamental presumption of innocence unless there is specific evidence to the contrary

We’ve decided to password protect any posts about the kids, hopefully just for a short while.  Anyone I know or who reads regularly can have the password–just leave a message and I’ll send it to you.

I recently sent an email to Liberal Vision, a Liberal Democrat campaigning group and Sara Scarlett has kindly agreed to highlight our cause with a post today on their website.

http://www.liberal-vision.org/2010/01/04/we-dont-need-your-education/

My letter follows:

Dear Editors,

I recently encountered your site following your post on Ed Balls’ interview with Peter Allan. I was also struck by LIBERAL VISION’s statements looking to halt and then swiftly reverse the growth in the state bureaucracy, and your concern about the government’s assault on civil liberties and personal privacy and the belief you expressed in choice and personal freedom.

I have recently had cause to be concerned about these issues myself, as the right that my wife and I have to home-educate our children is being threatened by legislation proposed in the Children, Schools and Families Bill, which is being fast-tracked through Parliament.

This legislation was based on the seriously flawed Badman Review of Elective Home Education which was recently criticised by the Children, Schools and Families Select Committee. The legislation was drafted before the Select Committee could finish reporting and also before the conclusion of a DCSF consultation on Elective Home Education which drew an unprecedented 5000 responses from the Home Education Community.

The legislation seeks a compulsory annual licensing arrangement for Home Educators policed by an enlarged Local Authority officialdom. The arrangements include provisions for frequent monitoring and for children to be interviewed in their home by local authority officers without the presence of their parents and without the legal safeguards that are currently required in criminal or social-care cases.

The enforcement of the registration and monitoring regime is to be carried out with the threat of the issue of School Attendance Orders: for failing to register, failing to supply an educational plan, failing to cooperate with local authority officers, if for any reason the official disagreed with the chosen educational philosophy, if the child failed to demonstrate the expected progress, etc. This would mean that the child would be forced into a school environment in which many may have been bullied or not had their special educational needs met.

The cost to the taxpayer is referred to in the Bill as being up to £99 Million pounds simply to set up the bureaucracy. None of this money would go to enhance educational provisions, which Home Educators currently provide at their own expense.

The changes are also likely to include the involvement of Ofsted, which has recommended that Home Educators are CRB checked to care for their own children, presumably also at the parents’ expense.

The proposals have caused an outcry in the Home Education community, demonstrated recently by the record breaking presentation of over 120 petitions to parliament supported by over 70 MPs on the 8^th of December.

We currently have support from the Conservative party to oppose the draconian measures of the Badman Review, but do not yet have the same commitment from the Liberal Democratic Party. However, we are grateful for the declared support from a number of Liberal Democrat MPs including Sir Alan Beith and Paul Burstow.

If you were able to highlight this issue on your top-ranking site, it would be a significant boost to our efforts to get Clause 26 rejected from the Children, Schools and Families Bill. 

Many thanks

On the 8th of December there was a record breaking event in Parliament here in the UK.  Seventy MPs presented over 120 Petitions to Parliament from Home Educators across the country in response to the draconian measures put forth by the Badman Review into Elective Home Education.   As of today, we have had well over 180 petitions presented to Parliament, with many more to be handed in when Parliament reconvenes.

I was compliling a list of quotes from MPs who have presented pettions to Parliament for Home Educators here in the UK, and I thought I’d share a few of them.  As you will notice, MPs from every party have presented petitions.

Richard Benyons Quote (my favourite!)

“I recognise the right of parents to educate their children at home. It is the parents’ decision and, as such, must be respected. Home educators from West Berkshire whom I have met have impressed me with their approach to the responsible task of educating their children. Of course it is not for everyone but I totally reject the Governments ham fisted attempt to over regulate this group of parents”

Sir Alan Beith (Lib Dem)

 ”The Badman Report proposals look like an over-bureaucratic approach when proper use of existing powers by local authorities may be all that is needed. It is important to safe-guard the rights of parents to home-educate their children.”

John Hemming (Birmingham, Yardley)  (LD) December 1, 2009

“I was impressed on Saturday by this petition, which came from people who share my concerns about the state wrongly intervening in family life.”

Graham Stuart (Beverly and Holderness) (Con)  December 8, 2009

“This is an historic night. More than 70 right hon. and hon. Members will present petitions from more than 120 different constituencies opposing the compulsory registration and monitoring of home-educated children.”

“If enacted, the Government’s proposals will, for the first time in our history, tear away from parents and give to the state the responsibility for a child’s education.”

Sir Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) (Con) December 8, 2009

“I should like to present a petition on behalf of a number of residents of the Macclesfield constituency, strongly opposed to the ill-judged recommendations of the Badman report.”

Edward Vaizey (Wantage) (Con) December 8, 2009

“It is my honour and privilege to present a petition on behalf of 36 constituents of mine-that is just the tip of the iceberg-objecting to the Badman report in the terms already put forward.”

Charlotte Atkins (Staffordshire, Moorlands) (Lab) December 8, 2009

“I am delighted to present a petition of 121 names from the constituency of Staffordshire, Moorlands protesting about the recommendations of the Badman report. I am delighted to have met several of the children involved when they presented the petition to me.”

Nick Herbert (Arundel and South Downs) (Con) December 8, 2009

“I would like to present a petition on behalf of the home educators of Arundel and South Downs, who are as furious about this as those of my hon. Friends and many hon. Members in all parts of the House. I believe that the Government should take notice of the strength of feeling on this issue and the numbers of hon. Members who have presented petitions this evening.”

Bob Spink (Castle Point) (Ind) December 14, 2009

“I believe that the state does not always know better than the parents how they should bring up and educate their children. I am, therefore, delighted to present this petition on the Badman report, which has been signed by a number of my very caring and well-informed constituents. They are right to be concerned.”

Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con) December 15, 2009

“I wish to present a petition in similar terms, in the names of Mr. and Mrs. McCallum and others residing in the Vale of York. I am a great supporter of home education, and I pay tribute to the home educators. We are fortunate enough to have a particularly good local education authority in North Yorkshire, but I agree with the concerns raised by the petitioners-that the Badman review was rushed, that its conclusions did not pay regard to the evidence, and that it confers undue powers of inspection-and I hope that the Government will reconsider.”

Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam) (LD) December 16, 2009

“I am presenting this petition on behalf of Samia Tossio and a group of home educators in my constituency of Sutton and Cheam and in Worcester Park. It is one of a number of petitions to be presented to the House over the past few weeks that address the issue of the Government’s plans dramatically to extend the state’s power over family life, calling into question the freedom of parents responsibly to choose what is best for their children. The proposal would effectively nationalise home education, requiring all parents who choose to home educate to seek permission every year to do so. I believe that that is a disproportionate, ill-conceived and illiberal measure.”

I don’t think I expected more.  I don’t think we could have gotten more.  I most certainly don’t think we have gotten what we should have.  I think they barely slapped Badman and the Children, Schools and Families department on their wrists for such a shoddy report. I don’t think they touched enough on how badly our reputations have been damaged.  I still don’t think they’ve proven the need for their interference in our lives.

 Questions for tonight:

Why do we need to register?

There is still no proven record that any child not on yet another register would be safer.  They mention over and over again that this information is needed.  But why? By whom?  They even suggest it would be beneficial to me—how?  What will my putting our names on a list provide for me?  I have not asked for anything, I do not want anything.  Really-they aren’t going to pay for the kids dance lessons or their private music lessons.  And no-we will not settle for our children joining in a music lesson at a school.  We have seen first hand how wonderful one-on-one tuition is.  They aren’t going to buy books for us, paper, pens, glue, computers or printers.  So can someone please explain how I, my husband or my children will benefit from registration?

Why do we need to register annually?

This is a huge waste of time to me, the LA and I’m sure it’ll be a costly system.    Why not just say, register once and that it’ll be updated as and if there are any changes to the child’s educational provisions.  That makes more sense to me, and would save tax payers money on yet another wasteful programme.

If it’s a registration, how can it be revoked?

They mention a few times in the review that the registration cannot just be revoked on a whim by the LA.  How can a registration be revoked?  Why not just call it what it really is—a license. 

What criteria will be set up to decide if the voluntary registration system will be considered a success or failure?

The Committee is trying to appease the Home Educators by saying they want it to be a voluntary registration system for two years, and then they’ll review.  What will they review?  What will make a voluntary registration successful?  Is this their way to ease in a mandatory registration?  Are they going to conduct another rushed, flawed and non-independent review to come up with more draconian measures?  What will they do if after one year no one voluntarily registers to make them happy?

And, isn’t it pretty sad that they still have not worked out how much all of this will cost nor how it will be done.  If they can’t work that out, how are they going to work out if it was successful or not?

Many LAs say Home Educators welcome the LA contact. Why?

What do they welcome?  I’m quite happy to have a chat once a week with my butcher or a check out clerk—and I’m sure the local LA may be a nice enough person to have a chat with.  But that’s all they do—have a chat.  Yes, some people may feel insecure in what they are doing, especially if they are just starting out.  But I am not one of those people.  I don’t care what anyone else has to say about my family life, or anything to do with my children. My children are happy and thriving-I don’t need that pointed out to me.

What have these happy home educators gotten from the LA other than a nice pat on the back?  I have as yet to hear of any real help given to any family.  And even in this report, no support is offered, none planned, and they have no idea where to start or how they would pay for anything.  Looks like once again-no benefit for anyone to be known by their LA.

It seems to me an awful waste of taxpayer’s money to send someone out to a home educating families home to have a chat.  I’m sure Ofsted can direct that money to the 1,400 primary schools in England that fall below the government’s “floor target” for pupils’ attainment in English and maths.  

 What is a suitable education?

Neither Graham Badman or this Select Committee seem to grasp that the government already has a definition of a suitable education.  This just goes to show, they do not know their own laws.

 The Education Act of 1996, section 7 states:

 Compulsory education

7 Duty of parents to secure education of children of compulsory school age

The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable—

(a) to his age, ability and aptitude, and

(b) to any special educational needs he may have,

either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.

 Why can’t they understand that the government has already defined what a suitable education is, and have enshrined it in law?  It expresses just what I, and most home educators, feel is the perfect definition of a suitable education.  We tailor our children’s educations to their needs and abilities, unlike schools.

Even if they can’t think outside the box and can’t realize that not all educational achievements need to be tick-boxed, they should at least have figured out by now that the government must actually have a way of checking if the children in school are receiving a suitable education.  Have they not realized that there are actual attainment levels set up to judge how well all 11 million school children are doing?  Is their inability to read their own laws going to cost this country another million or so pounds, by them conducting a review into what a suitable education is?  Did they not do this before they put the Education Act of 1996 into law?  Did the DCSF not do this when they set up the attainment levels for the National Curriculum?

These are just my initial responses to this review:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmchilsch.htm

I’ll be back with some more thoughts tomorrow.

“Safeguarding the vulnerable – strengthening the powers of local authorities and others with regards to registration, inspection and intervention will mean effective systems are in place to protect those that most need it. The Bill will introduce a new home educators’ registration system and take new powers for Secretaries of State to intervene in youth offending teams that are failing and potentially putting young people and their communities at risk.”   http://tinyurl.com/yaywqu8

To say that the above statement has not angered me right down to the very core of my being would be the most major understatement of the past few months. 

Many things have angered me during this process:

• The ineptness and audacity of the Badman report.
• The insinuations that our children aren’t safe.
• The complete ignorance this country has about home education.
• The complete lack of concern the public has shown for the possibility that parents  may need CRB checks to be with their children. 
• The complete lack of help in fighting this from my husbands family.
• That 2 family members lied about signing a petition.  Um—if they had even bothered to read it they would have realized all names are visible.  (And no-they weren’t directly asked to sign it, it was a general request sent out on Facebook.)
• The amount of time away from my children this has caused.
• That I’ve had to listen to stupid comments like:

“I am reasonably happy with the education my children receive…”

I’m sorry—but no one should be ‘reasonably happy’ with their children’s education.  Other than providing them with a loving family, a good education is essential in life.  Our children deserve the very best, we should be ‘overjoyed’ with their education, not ‘reasonably happy’.

“…the recent events will have taught Hazel and Kieran a great deal about politics.”

If anyone is so thick to believe we have looked at this as a wonderful opportunity to teach our children about politics you are stupider than Balls and Badman.  I did not ‘choose’ to have our way of life threatened, because the government is failing to provide a decent education to children in schools and that they, and most of the population, cannot think outside the box. 

BUT: to say MY children and all the home educating children in this country are ‘vulnerable’ is just a step too far.  These children are not vulnerable.  They are not the ones fobbed off to nurseries and schools from six-weeks of age.  They are not the ones receiving an ‘OK’ education.  They are not the Baby P’s and Khyra Ishaq’s of this world.  No—our children are not the vulnerable or the ones failed by the State.  How dare the State try to hide their failings by trying to make decent families their scapegoats?

No state education will ever match the quality of education a child who is loved and who is allowed to explore the world in whatever direction they want will receive.  Our children are not force fed an education—they are actively pursuing one—and doing so at their own free will.

I’m sorry, but you have crossed the line of decency Mr. Balls.  How dare you class home educated children in with the truly vulnerable.  Not one study has ever proved anything other than that:

Home educated children are SAFER, HAPPIER and ACHIEVING MORE than any group of schooled children.  Those are the facts—and you will be made to face up to it. 

You cannot victimize decent, honest and loving people like this.  You will not get away with this. We will fight you every step of the way.

            I will never apply for your license to educate my children. 

            I will never have a CRB check to be with my children.

No LA will ever speak to my children or evaluate their education.

You may have crossed the line, but you will not get any further.

My favourite bits:

32 Having read the Review, we still stand by the final paragraph of our response:

32.1 “We have seen no evidence to show that the majority of home educated children do not achieve the five Every Child Matters outcomes, and are therefore not convinced of the need to change the current system of monitoring the standard of home education. Where there are particular concerns about the children in a home-educating this should be a matter for Children’s Services.”

and:

20 We felt that the terms of reference of the Review were too heavily weighted towards monitoring and the perception of barriers to monitoring. There was an insistence that the Government’s five Every Child Matters outcomes are the most important for children. This seems to contradict the Children’s Plan mantra that it is ‘Parents not Government that bring up children.’ For Home Educating families, these may not be the most important or valuable outcomes.

and:

21 The premise that things need to be improved, changed, monitored and that children who are home educated and their parents must conform to Government’s agenda for school-educated children pervades the whole of this review. It appears that the Review has been written to concur with the view that there should be more regulation and legislation, despite having received many submissions sent in to the Review by home educators.

                                                                                             C of E Submission  

Maybe, just maybe, the Select Committee may realize what we have all been shouting about.  This was not a review, it was a deliberate attack on home educators in England.  This was a preordained attempt to smear home educators with the public.  The only gain that could be made from this is that the government wants all of us under their control.  Does it embarrass them that a small subsection of society, that is not under their direct control, has children that are thriving under the educational provisions their parents provide for them, while the state school system is getting worse, year upon year?

Mr. Balls:      We are not child abusers.

                     We do not sell our children to strangers.

                     We do not lock our children in a closet all day.

                     We do not despise our children.

I hope our actions are making it clear: we will not just roll over and play dead for you.  We will not bow down to your hideous accusations.

You have tarnished our reputations.  You have stolen our time away from our children to fight you and Mr. Badman and all your false accusations.  You have caused stress among countless families.  Many children are now worried that  their parents may face imprisonment if they do not conform to your devious ways.

We are home educating our children because we feel they deserve the very best that life has to offer.  Our children are happy and thriving!  Home educated children are a diverse group of children living right now, within their communities.  We spend our days exploring all there is in this country and further afield.  Our children meet with all sorts of people in their daily lives: the butchers, shop clerks, relatives, private music teachers, Church leaders, Scout leaders, Museum staff, other home educators, our neighbours, and all manner of people from infants to the elderly.

My children are probably more well known in our community than your own children.  Why? Because mine aren’t shut away all day in a brick building with a tarmac playground (or should that be ‘exercise yard’?) surrounded by a large steel fence with spikes on top. 

Mine are living in the real world—right now.  They do not have to suffer in an institution until someone like you deems them ready for the ‘real’ world.  They’re living in the real world every second of every day.  And no one-especially you, is going to take that away.

We home educate because we love and respect our children, and will do anything in our power to give them the best possible start in life.  We cherish our children-and how dare you try and make the world think otherwise.

Ed Balls—-The review was a sham and should be incinerated, and a public apology for tarnishing our reputations should be forthcoming.