Mr Shannon asked why there are more children with specia [6D [K special needs today than in the past, highlighting that when he was a child [5D [K child such cases were less common.

Mr Khan agreed with Mr Stafford's arguments and pointed [K out that financial cuts to transport for SEND children exacerbate the probl [5D [K problem of support quality.

The current system for supporting children with special [K educational needs and disabilities is failing, causing distress to families [8D [K families. The system relies on parents battling at every step to secure the [3D [K the necessary support, which is an exclusionary and inequitable practice. H [1D [K Helen Hayes emphasises that accountability is crucial in reforming the syst [4D [K system, as are early identification of needs, inclusive mainstream schools, [8D [K schools, increased funding, and involvement of parents in decision-making p [1D [K processes. She also highlights concerns from parents about the proposed cha [3D [K changes, particularly regarding the scaling back of EHC assessments and EHC [3D [K EHCPs, which may undermine accountability.

Intervened to express concern over exclusions for childr [6D [K children with special educational needs and disabilities. Rachel Blake seek [4D [K seeks clarity on how the proposed system will ensure accountability and pre [3D [K prevent trauma from exclusionary practices.

Asked Helen Hayes about the concerns of a constituent, O [1D [K Olivia, who is battling to keep her son in mainstream education. Luke Chart [5D [K Charters emphasises the importance of quick implementation of individual su [2D [K support plans (ISPs) to avoid distress for families trying to maintain thei [4D [K their children in mainstream settings.

Asked Helen Hayes about the concerns raised by parents r [1D [K regarding exclusions and trauma. Stella Creasy is interested in understandi [11D [K understanding how accountability will work in the future system to address [K these issues.

Children in West Lancashire have previously felt let dow [3D [K down by the SEND system. The Government's plans include a vast increase in [K specialist places and training for teachers, which will make a real differe [7D [K difference to children and families. However, it is crucial that the change [6D [K changes do not inadvertently move fights from one place to another or weake [5D [K weaken parents' rights under current legislation. Dalton cites examples of [K local authority failures and calls on the Minister to ensure that reforms s [1D [K support SEND children and their families as much as possible.

George responds to Dalton's speech, highlighting concern [7D [K concerns about the number of tribunals required for parents to get proper e [1D [K education for their children with SEND. He also raises issues regarding aut [3D [K authorities failing to meet the 20-week EHCP target, which results in many [K pupils not getting the services they need.

Creasy agrees with Dalton's concerns and emphasises that [4D [K that any reforms must support parents to be heard within the educational sy [2D [K system. She highlights the issue of parents having to go to tribunal to ens [3D [K ensure their children receive proper education.

Campbell congratulates Stafford on bringing forward the [K debate and expresses pride in the Government's commitment to reforming the [K SEND system through the White Paper. She notes that under the current syste [5D [K system, parents often feel unsupported and traumatised. Campbell supports e [1D [K early interventions and additional staff training but calls for further det [3D [K detail on teacher training curriculum reforms to ensure newly qualified tea [3D [K teachers are equipped with necessary skills.

Expressed concerns about the significant funding dispari [7D [K disparity between local authorities, highlighting that the East Riding of Y [1D [K Yorkshire is the lowest-funded for SEND at approximately £1,000 per pupil, [K compared to Camden's £3,800. He emphasised the historical problem caused by [2D [K by a non-functional funding formula and called on the Minister to address t [1D [K this issue during ongoing consultations.

Supported Charlie Dewhirst’s arguments about the need fo [2D [K for better SEND provision, expressing concerns that the current proposals i [1D [K in the White Paper might weaken parents' rights to secure specific provisio [8D [K provisions through tribunals. He urged the Government to listen to parents’ [8D [K parents’ concerns and make necessary adjustments.

Welcomed the schools White Paper as a significant attemp [6D [K attempt to improve life for disabled children, families, and those with SEN [3D [K SEND, mentioning the £4 billion investment in school improvements. He raise [5D [K raised questions about enforceability of support plans, health and social c [1D [K care coordination, and family support, urging the Minister for clear legal [K routes and better co-ordination.

Welcomed the £4.8 million investment in SEND adaptations [11D [K adaptations by this Government but acknowledged that reform is long overdue [7D [K overdue beyond just extra funding. He emphasised the need for sustained cha [3D [K change and better support for families.

Supported the White Paper's reforms while highlighting c [1D [K concerns from parents about enforceability of individual support plans and [K accountability if schools fail to deliver necessary support. He urged for c [1D [K clearer pathways to resolution in such cases.

Thanked the hon. Member for Farnham and Bordon for calli [5D [K calling the debate, noted that his inbox is overflowing with concerns about [5D [K about SEND provision in Surrey. Acknowledged the confirmation of funding fo [2D [K for a new academy but highlighted the high number of SEND tribunal appeals [K in Surrey as a sign of systemic dysfunction. Cited examples of parents' str [3D [K struggles and criticised Surrey county council's leadership for failing to [K acknowledge these issues. Raised concern over financial risks associated wi [2D [K with local government reorganisation in Surrey. Concluded by questioning wh [2D [K whether the Government’s proposed reforms will deliver meaningful change or [2D [K or simply repackage an existing system that fails families.

Acknowledged the necessity of reforming the SEND system [K inherited from the previous government. Noted increases in high needs block [5D [K block allocation and capital investment for Lancashire, but expressed conce [5D [K concern over delays in EHCP finalisation and parents' struggles with local [K authority failures. Emphasised the importance of putting the voices of pare [4D [K parents, carers, and young people at the heart of reforms. Welcomed the Gov [3D [K Government’s road map for change and its commitment to delivering a more co [2D [K consistent, earlier, clearer, and fairer system.

Reflected on surgeries where parents expressed dissatisf [9D [K dissatisfaction with SEND evaluations. Addressed the expansion of EHCPs and [3D [K and the challenges in meeting needs within budget constraints. Highlighted [K concerns over moving from a rights-based system to a resource-led one, noti [4D [K noting risks of underdiagnosis or failing to meet individual needs. Emphasi [7D [K Emphasised the need for an honest conversation about definitional parameter [9D [K parameters and what can realistically be provided.

Supports the proposals for SEND reform, acknowledging th [2D [K that the current system is broken. Advocates for early intervention measure [7D [K measures such as Experts at Hand and individual support plans to address sy [2D [K systemic issues in special educational needs provision.

Critiques the underlying argument that there has been an [2D [K an increase in SEND children, suggesting it is due to policy changes like t [1D [K the scrapping of Sure Start. Shares a personal story about a constituent's [K son who was out of school for years due to delays in receiving an EHCP and [K eventually attempted suicide, highlighting the urgent need for reform and a [1D [K accountability.

Highlights the challenges faced by schools and local aut [3D [K authorities in Cornwall with regard to SEND provision. Describes multiple c [1D [K cases of constituents' children who have been denied or delayed EHCPs, resu [4D [K resulting in significant educational gaps. Supports the Government's propos [6D [K proposed investment but urges for quicker legislative change.

Declared an interest as a member of the all-party parlia [6D [K parliamentary group for special educational needs and disabilities, and as [K the parent of a child with an EHCP. Criticised the current SEND system for [K being broken and not meeting children's needs at an early stage. Emphasised [10D [K Emphasised the importance of equitable education and addressing unmet needs [5D [K needs. Raised concerns about accountability, workforce planning, and suppor [6D [K support for parents. Highlighted the need for better implementation and cla [3D [K clarity on how to address existing issues.

Expressed concern over the adequacy of consultations wit [3D [K with stakeholders, the premature instruction to local authorities to begin [K reforming their systems before consultation conclusions, the workforce capa [4D [K capacity required for ambitious reforms, and the potential weakening of fam [3D [K families' ability to challenge decisions. Asked if the Government would ens [3D [K ensure genuine public consultation, provide clarity on workforce training a [1D [K and funding, protect families' rights to challenge decisions, and ensure th [2D [K that reforms are transparent, evidence-led, and properly resourced.

Focused on three main issues: changing the culture in ed [2D [K education to be more inclusive, addressing funding and staffing shortages, [K and improving governance. Emphasised the need for a nurturing environment t [1D [K that considers children's long-term needs, not just short-term results. Cal [3D [K Called for an integrated workforce plan with NHS plans and questioned the i [1D [K impact of academisation on accountability.

Welcomed the Government’s recent White Paper on SEND ref [3D [K reforms, emphasising the importance of addressing growing needs and priorit [7D [K prioritising early intervention. She supported the focus on inclusion throu [5D [K through improving support in mainstream settings but raised concerns about [K funding, parental rights, staffing, and curriculum reform. Caroline Voaden [K questioned the adequacy of the £4 billion pledge for reforms, expressing wo [2D [K worry that other areas of school budgets may be cut to accommodate this. Sh [2D [K She also highlighted the need for clarity on funding sources and restrictio [10D [K restrictions tied to debt relief for councils. Concerns were raised about c [1D [K changes to the tribunal system potentially limiting parental rights and exp [3D [K expressed anxiety over staffing shortages which are crucial for implementin [11D [K implementing inclusive approaches.

The speaker acknowledges the wide-ranging debate on SEND [4D [K SEND reforms and expresses appreciation for the efforts of Members like Gre [3D [K Gregory Stafford. He highlights the significant delays in the White Paper a [1D [K and emphasises the need to address parental anxieties, which have been exac [4D [K exacerbated by delayed reforms and unclear communication from the Governmen [9D [K Government. Bhatti discusses specific concerns raised by parents regarding [K the proposed dilution of legal rights, such as the removal of the right to [K appeal EHCP decisions, and questions the Minister about the impact on fundi [5D [K funding gaps and implementation timelines. He also raises issues around the [3D [K the availability of speech and language therapists and other specialist sup [3D [K support services, asking for clarity on staffing requirements and training [K needs. Additionally, he critiques the lack of detail in policy plans for in [2D [K inclusion in mainstream schools and asks how these reforms will be funded w [1D [K without impacting overall education spending.

Moore raises concerns about the standardisation approach [8D [K approach associated with ISPs that may result from White Paper reforms, que [3D [K questioning whether the shadow minister shares these views regarding the di [2D [K direction of these reforms under a Labour Government.

Vince inquires if Saqib Bhatti will give way to address [K concerns about the patchy delivery of SEND services by local councils, noti [4D [K noting significant variations in council performance.

Duncan Smith voices fears among parents regarding propos [6D [K proposed White Paper reforms and the inconsistent quality of EHCPs across d [1D [K different councils. He questions how patchy delivery will be addressed.

Shastri-Hurst agrees with Bhatti's concerns about the lo [2D [K loss of planned special schools, such as the one for Tamworth Lane, which h [1D [K he believes puts additional pressures on mainstream schools and negatively [K impacts parents and pupils.