MEDIA INFORMATION FROM ACTION FOR HOME EDUCATION
See also http://ahed.pbwiki.com
JOINT MEDIA RELEASE FROM SCHOOLHOUSE AND AHED
For immediate release, 1 June 2008
EVERY SINGLE PARENT MATTERS?
Families fight back in the face of Government forced labour regime
Parents and children across the UK are being urged to ask their MPs and Children's Commissioners if they will fight for families in the face of the UK Government's proposed new Social Security regulations which are due to come before the UK Parliament before the summer recess.[1]
Under the new rules, lone parents who depend on Income Support while caring for their children will lose benefits unless they actively seek work as soon as their youngest child reaches 12 (from November 2008), with the age threshhold reducing to seven by 2010.
The Every Single Parent Matters? campaign [2] has been launched by Schoolhouse, Scotland's national home education support organisation, and AHEd,its counterpart south of the border, in response to the draconian measures, which they have jointly condemned as a "forced labour regime for lone parents".
The campaign will involve a postcard lobby of MPs and Children's Commissioners throughout the UK by parents and young people who oppose the Government's plans to impoverish lone parents whose first priority is caring for their children.
The launch has been timed to coincide with the short consultation [3], which ends on Friday 13th June, prior to the regulations being brought before Parliament.
Launching the campaign, AHEd Chair, Barbara Stark, said:
"These regulations will effectively transfer parents' responsibility to decide what is best for their own children's care on to Job Centre bureaucrats, who will simply follow the government mantra to 'get lone parents into work' regardless of family circumstances.
"Financial sanctions will be imposed on lone parents who fail to comply because they already have a full time unpaid job, and the loss of benefits will plunge already poor families below subsistence level. If parents are punished in this way, their children will pay dearly."
Schoolhouse Convener, Alison Preuss, added:
"The UK Government has made it clear they see no value in parenting and would rather see mums and dads out flippping burgers on the minimum wage, topped up with tax credits, child care subsidies and housing benefits, than caring for their own children. This will of course cost the public purse far more than providing the safety net of Income Support for families, especially where children have special needs.
"Despite assurances from the Government that flexibility will be built in to the new system at local level, lone parents have reported that Job Centre Plus staff have already stated there will be no exceptions."
While Social Security matters are reserved to the UK Government, campaigners argue that the new regulations will impact adversely on children and families and should therefore also be a matter of concern to the devolved administrations. MSPs and AMs will also be asked what they will do to support lone parent families.
AHEd and Schoolhouse will collate the responses from elected representatives and Children's Commissioners and make these available on their websites, along with details of non respondents.
ENDS
For further information please contact:
Barbara Stark ahed@ahed.org.uk
Alison Preuss media@schoolhouse.org.uk or 0772 962 3532
NOTES FOR EDITORS
[1] See http://www.ssac.org.uk/pdf/draft_regs_140508.pdf
[2] For campaign information, see http://schoolhouse.org.uk/pc or http://www.ahed.org.uk/pc
[3] See http://www.ssac.org.uk/pdf/consultation_140508.pdf
Joint media release from Action for Home Education and Schoolhouse
For immediate release, Friday 9 May 2008
GOVERNMENT ACCUSED OF IMPOVERISHING CHILDREN THROUGH FORCED LABOUR REGIME FOR LONE PARENTS
Action for Home Education (AHEd) [1] and Scotland's national home education support organisation, Schoolhouse [2], have jointly expressed deep dismay and disappointment at the UK Government's decision to remove the safety net of Income Support (IS) from lone parents whose youngest child is aged 12 years from November 2008. The age threshhold will subsequently be reduced so that, by 2010, lone parents will be required to actively seek work when their youngest child reaches seven.
While the Government claims it will help "lift children out of poverty", the move promises to cause extreme stress and hardship for many families, including those who home educate, those whose children have special needs or disabilities and those who have been abandoned by partners, as well as widowed parents and mothers fleeing domestic violence.
Despite warnings from individuals and organisations representing vulnerable families that children will be further impoverished as a result [3], the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has indicated that it will press on with draconian measures to force lone parents into work as soon as their children reach the designated age threshhold, regardless of individual circumstances.
Danny Alexander MP has tabled a Parliamentary Question [4] seeking
Government reassurances in relation to specific vulnerable groups who will be thrown into financial crisis by the new rules and for whom it was strongly felt that there should be no extension of conditionality during the 'In Work Better Off' consultation.
Meanwhile, Tom Clarke MP has indicated that he is to table further Parliamentary Questions seeking clarification from the Minister as to which specific regulations will apply, following the withdrawal of Income Support, to "home educating lone parents who are already engaged in full time employment providing a full time education for their children".
AHEd chair Barbara Stark said: "One of our members received via her MP a wholly unsatisfactory and insulting response from the Minister, Stephen Timms, who suggests that home educating parents can be much more flexible in their working arrangements than schooling parents. Who exactly will be available to look after and educate children while their parents are at work outside the home? These parents are already working hard with parenting and education responsibilities and doing an excellent job. Does the Minister only deem child care and education to be 'work' if it is undertaken by someone other than the parent?"
AHEd and Schoolhouse have challenged the Government to explain how it is possible to lift children out of poverty by removing IS payments from lone parents when they will effectively be precluded from claiming JSA due to already having full time caring and/or educational responsibilities. In particular they have questioned the justification for withdrawing IS from home educating parents when the costs to keep a child in school are considerably greater than the costs of providing benefits.
Schoolhouse convener Alison Preuss said: "These UK Government proposals were first flagged up in January 2007 by one of our members who was concerned that lone parents home educating their children, often through necessity as a result of special needs or disabilities, would have their Income Support withdrawn if they did not make themselves available for paid employment. Tom Clarke MP
subsequently obtained assurances from the then Minister John Hutton that home educating lone parents' responsibilities would be fully recognised [5], but the Government has now indicated that no exceptions will be made to its forced labour regime for single parents."
Despite the revenue savings to the Treasury, the Minister suggests that home educating families are receiving a subsidy by accepting subsistence benefits, stating in his letter: "The Government position is that parents who choose to home educate their children will not receive any financial assistance from the State for doing so. It is therefore consistent with the Government principles. Under the new welfare reform changes, we require home educators to look for work when their child reaches the new relevant age threshold."
AHEd and Schoolhouse have jointly condemned the Minister's failure to recognise that schools are unable to accommodate the needs of a significant number of young people, leaving some parents no choice but to take full responsibility for their children's education, since schools are unable or unwilling to provide for the needs of individual children. Pete Derby, AHEd Correspondent for Wales said, "the government is proposing to punish parents for taking care of their children. These measures supposedly aimed at lifting children out of poverty will force vulnerable children into dangerous situations. As the minister's predecessor stated, forcing parents to prioritise paid employment above their parenting responsibility would be wrong in principle and damaging to the health and well-being of children."
Former home educator, Karen Best, who was a lone parent reliant entirely on IS until her daughter reached school leaving age, has also spoken out against the government's proposals which she believes will remove an essential lifeline from desperate parents. Describing her own circumstances, she said: "I removed my daughter, who has profound learning difficulties and special needs, from school when she was 10 years old after a prolonged period of bullying which had resulted in her self harming and threatening suicide. I was a single parent on Income Support and struggling to cope financially as well as with an extremely unhappy child.
Since the school and local authority failed to deal with the problems, home education became the only option for us and we never looked back, although I lost entitlement to free school meals and clothing vouchers as soon as I removed my daughter from school and got no support or resources from the local authority. Now, it seems, the Governnment wants to completely pull the financial rug out from under the most vulnerable parents and children. How on earth can they justify impoverishing children and penalising single parents in this way?"
Karen went on to obtain higher qualifications and now works full time in the travel industry, while her daughter Charlene, now 20, is currently on a work experience placement, having previously undertaken supported learning at her local further education college. Commenting on her own experience, Charlene said: "I hated school so much because it was full of bullies and the teachers didn't want to know about it. I have a great life now because home education saved me from the bullies."
Gill Kilner is another parent who with her son, Tom, has never looked back since taking up home education because the school did not recognise his severe dyslexia was making schoolwork impossible. Gill says, "at only nine years old, he was sinking into depression, sleeping badly and starting to behave in very uncharacteristic ways both at school and at home. Thank goodness I was able to home educate. I don't think my son would have survived well at all in the system but ten years on he is still in home education, preparing to go into business."
ENDS
For further information, please contact:
Barbara Stark on 01623 431 079 or ahed@ahed.org.uk
Alison Preuss on 0772 962 3532 or media@schoolhouse.org.uk
NOTES TO EDITORS
[1] See http://www.ahed.org.uk
http://ahed.pbwiki.com/
[2] See http://www.schoolhouse.org.uk
[3] One Parent Families/Gingerbread comments on the proposals when first mooted:
"One Parent Families .. warned that any moves to place tougher conditions on claiming benefits for parents with secondary school age children would be the wrong approach.
"Those with children in this age group who are not working often have very good reasons for being at home full-time. Lone parents want help in getting over the hurdles they face when they are ready to work, not further impoverishment when they are needed at home."
[4] Lib Dem spokesperson for Work and Pensions, Danny Alexander, MP, has tabled the following PQ:
"To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether he thinks that
lone parents receiving income support should be subject to increased
conditionality in cases where they are a) parents of disabled children b) carers of both disabled children and adults c) mothers fleeing domestic violence d) parents who choose to home educate."
[5] Excerpts from a reply by John Hutton, former DWP Minister, to Tom
Clarke MP in February 2007:
"We have been very clear that we are not proposing to force lone
parents into work, nor cut lone parent benefits - this would be wrong
in principle and damaging to the health and well-being of children. It
is a matter of individual choice for each lone parent as to whether
they look to move into work or continue to claim benefits.
"I hope this reassures your constituent that our aim is to help those
parents for whom work is a realistic option to take the necessary
steps so that they can get back to work and lift their families out of
poverty"
January 2007
NEW HOME EDUCATION ACTION GROUP GOES AHEd
Action for Home Education (AHEd) [1], an internet-based rights group for England, Wales and
Northern Ireland, launches today in Derby with a pledge to act to protect the rights of
parents and children who wish to enjoy home-based education without undue state interference,
which they claim has reached an intolerable high and is set to worsen.
AHEd has arisen from a network of committed home educating parents whose
experience spans more than 25 years and in response to the increasingly urgent
calls from many different groups and individual home educators, for an action
group to complement the work of current home education support groups. AHEd is an
affiliate of the Scottish home education association, Schoolhouse, who
support families in Scotland [2], and a member of the Centre for Personalised Education
Trust [3], whose trustees include the highly respected academic researcher on home-based
education, Dr Roland Meighan, and whose member organisations are all committed to supporting
personalised education
Commenting on the urgent need for an organisation to tackle the challenges facing home
educating families, co-founder and chair of AHEd, Barbara Stark, who has home educated
her own children since 1980, said:
"For years home educators have tolerated unfair treatment and ultra vires practices
by Local Authorities whose understanding of home-based education is, with few exceptions,
minimal or non existent. We are tired of being subjected to unreasonable suspicion and
unfair scrutiny when we are doing the very best for our children. We believe there are
moves afoot by government to restrict traditional freedoms to educate children outside
the school system and we are determined to do our utmost to prevent this." [4]
According to New Labour mantra, every child matters, yet it blatantly attempts
to prescribe the same diet of schooling to every child regardless of his or her individual
needs and wishes.
AHEd asserts that EACH CHILD MATTERS, individually.
Each child matters individually to parents and it is parents who have the duty to make
important educational decisions. But AHEd members are deeply concerned that current proposals
by government threaten to remove parental responsibility and substitute the state as the arbiter
of what is best for children - from what goes into lunch boxes to what is put into minds; from
the portions of vegetables eaten per day to the content of every lesson at every stage
for every child. As an alliance of concerned home educating families who put our children's
needs first, we intend to make our voice heard by government."
Home educating parent and co-founding member of AHEd, Mrs Clare Wood, added: "We must not
allow the dark side of the state to create this unreasonable intrusion into private and
family lives. There is a real danger that we will lose our choices on the basis that government
no longer trusts parents to act in the best interest of their children. The time has come for
us to stand up and defend our rights. We know from experience that our children thrive on an
education that is tailored to their individual needs. Current and future generations must be
allowed to continue to benefit from real choice in education because despite government
rhetoric - EACH child matters."
EACH CHILD MATTERS and in order to provide properly for their individual needs, the freedom to
choose the how, where and what of our childrenÕs education is essential.
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
http://www.ahed.org.ukSee www.schoolhouse.org.ukhttp://c.person.ed.gn.apc.org/index.phpDfES are undertaking a review of local authority arrangements for home educators and have written to home educators saying that the state now wishes to prescribe the form of education that takes place in the home and impose compulsory home inspections upon families in order to question children in a new role as the decider and monitor of what all children should learn including those in private provisions and in their homes. DFEs have made it clear that they are considering changes in primary legislation to enable this. Current law makes parents responsible for the education of their children and does not support the level of surveillance and interference indicated by the department. The department has described these planned changes as 'light touch changes.'
For varied comment from home educators related to this agenda see:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2006-11-27b.103174.h
Other Issues of concern to AHEd:
-
The Education and Inspections bill section 94 puts all children of compulsory
education age who are present in public during school hours at risk of
being stopped, questioned and removed to a designated place when they have
committed no crime. Excluded children will be confined to house arrest. Home
educators fear their children will be similarly abducted or removed, given
that current truancy procedures already involve them and cause them problems
despite government promises to the contrary.
-
Every Child Matters
Children Missing Education-
Registration regulations
