Here's the evidence: There is no evidence!

Thanks, Ann N, for pointing me towards chapter 8.14, where Mr Badman admits - albeit in a roundabout way:

"8.14 - With regards to other specific groups within the remit of this inquiry I can find no evidence that elective home education is a particular factor in the removal of children to forced marriage, servitude or trafficking or for inappropriate abusive activities. Based on the limited evidence available, this view is supported by the Association of Chief Police Officers. That is not to say that there is no isolated cases of trafficking that have been brought to my attention."

That paragraph has most certainly been written with an intention to confuse, if nothing else. And my fingers are itching to pick this bit of manipulative writing to bits...
If only I had a bit more time... I might do it still, later...

But in spite of all the misleading phrases, in the end it says:
There is no evidence to support the allegations on which this review was started, that elective home education can be used as a cover for abuse, forced marriage, servitude or trafficking.

NO EVIDENCE.

Hello everybody!! MP's!! PM!! Media! Watchdog? Ombudsman? Anybody! (Other than Ed Balls and Baroness Morgan, because they knew this all along):
This Review was based on false allegations and the Report with its repulsive Recommendations should be declared invalid. Immediately!

Home Educators were harrassed and - especially the children - put in a potentially vulnerable position, which has definitely caused great distress, to say the least.

Who else can treat a minority group like this and get away with it, without consequences? What, not only get away with it, but even still make an attempt to get their own evil way?

Hello, Britain! Wake up! This charade has lasted long enough!
They've taken our money for their second homes and luxury meals, they're trying to take our freedom and they are aiming to take control of our lives, our children.

We need to stop them. Now!

B&B - Cheating and lying

I bet my last penny that if the allegations of child abuse in home education could have been substantiated in any way, it would have been not only on the first page of the report, it would also have been blown out of all proportions in the national media.

But the review didn't find any such evidence! **edit** See my next post with the quote from the report where Badman confirms the lack of evidence**** There is only a mention of the opinions and unsubstantiated assumptions of NSPCC, NASWE and LSCB in Chapter 8 [Safeguarding].
Still, that doesn't stop Ed Balls and Baroness Morgan to blatantly lie to both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

Here's what I found today: [opens website from which the following documents can be downloaded]
**edit** As the site apparently is not always accessible, I will copy the Statement of Ed Balls at the end of this post****

The Written Ministerial Statement (House of Commons), by Ed Balls - and
The Written Ministerial Statement (House of Lords), by Baroness Morgan of Drefelin.

The documents are similar, only the second one has an introduction by our dear Baroness Morgan.

The venom is in the tail.
I quote:

"The review also found evidence that there are a small number of cases where home educated children have suffered harm because safeguarding concerns were not picked up, or not treated with sufficient urgency, particularly where parents were uncooperative or obstructed local authority investigations."

And here again, as with the Submission of the Church of England in my previous post, there are no proper references given in Mr Badman's report. Sloppy, to say the least. No college teacher or professor would accept - or grade favourably - this report if it had been done by a student. Yet Ed Balls not only accepts it, but is trying to use it as a foundation for policy and new legislation.

Leading by example is one of the main principles in teaching, I would say.
How can the government even begin to expect me to trust them with anything, let alone the wellbeing, health, safety and - for crying out loud - the education of my children, if the example they're setting is one of low quality, cheating and lying?

Graham Badman and Ed Balls, sorry (well, not really), but both of you failed.
Miserably.

**edit: added - Written Ministerial Statement (House of Commons) by Ed Balls**

DEPARTMENT FOR CHILDREN SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES


Review of Elective Home Education in England


The Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (Ed Balls):

On 19 January 2009 I asked Graham Badman to carry out a review of elective home education in England. The terms of reference for the review emphasised the government's recognition of parents' well established right to educate their children at home. They also set out our commitments to keeping home educated children safe, and ensuring that they receive a suitable education. I am grateful to Graham Badman and the review team for conducting a thorough review which carefully considered extensive evidence provided by home educators; local authorities (LAs); and representatives from a wide range of organisations and individuals working with children and parents involved in home education.

The terms of reference commissioned Graham Badman to investigate the barriers to LAs and other public agencies in carrying out their safeguarding responsibilities; whether LAs were providing effective and appropriate support; and whether there was evidence of home education being used to cover child abuse. From this evidence, he was asked to identify whether any changes were needed to the current regime of monitoring home education.

The review makes a compelling case for substantial changes to the arrangements for supporting and monitoring home education. It recognises the wide range of philosophical and practical reasons that lie behind parents' decisions to home educate. It acknowledges that in some cases home educated children have been withdrawn from school under a range of difficult circumstances: this is reflected in the relatively high proportion of children with special educational needs who are home educated, and other cases where children have been bullied of had other experiences that leave them unable to attend school. These children and families need support from their local authorities in a way that enables them to access appropriate advice and guidance, receive specialist services, and use extended school provision and facilities such as leisure centres and libraries. The review argues for fresh thinking and further consultation with children, their families, local authorities and others involved in home education to identify ways to commission services for this very diverse sector in order to support the best possible outcomes for the children concerned.

The review also found evidence that there are a small number of cases where home educated children have suffered harm because safeguarding concerns were not picked up, or not treated with sufficient urgency, particularly where parents were uncooperative or obstructed local authority investigations. It sets out specific steps that should be taken to address these risks as well as improving the monitoring of the education provided: a compulsory registration scheme; a discretion to local authorities to prohibit home education where there are safeguarding concerns; and the right for LA representatives to interview home educated children to establish whether they are safe and receiving a suitable education. I am today launching a public consultation on these proposals so that they can be introduced to Parliament at the earliest possible opportunity.

Copies of the review and our initial response have been placed in the House Libraries.

Rules for some... Yet another reason to declare Badman's Report 'not valid'

Maybe not many people have seen the very first page of the Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England, but it's quite an interesting one. I've copied it here below:

==========
© Crown Copyright 2009

The text in this document (excluding the Royal Arms and other departmental or agency logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document specified.

Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

For any other use of this material please write to Office of Public Sector Information,
Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU or e-mail: licensing@opsi.gov.uk

ISBN: 9780102961133

==========

Please take note of the part I've highlighted, before you continue reading.

On page 13 in Chapter 4: Elective Home Education in Context - the Views of Home Educators and Others, Mr Badman writes:

==========
And the Education Division of the Church of England states its concern:

“that children and young people not in formal education are missing the benefits and
challenges of learning in community with their peers. Children who do not go to school may not experience the social and cultural diversity encountered there; they will not learn how to deal with the rough and tumble of everyday life; they may never meet people with different faith and value systems. All such encounters, even the difficult or painful ones are enriching. We are concerned not only with the five Every Child Matters outcomes, but also with the spiritual well-being of all children and young people. Spiritual well-being arises not only from being cared for in a loving family and/or faith community, but also in encounters with people of different opinions and backgrounds; in learning to listen to a variety of opinions; to encounter diversity and the riches and life-enhancement it can bring. Spiritual well-being depends on living and taking a full part in community life. Children and young people in schools learn about and from the five major religions. This may be a difficult part of the curriculum for home educators to provide, yet it is vital for the Government’s community cohesion agenda that all children learn in a balanced way about the variety of religious values and practices, and to be encouraged to question their own beliefs and practices.”
==========

Mr Badman may view it a 'fundamental problem' that home educating parents do not have a 'representative voice' [page 14, 4.10] but that doesn't mean we don't communicate with each other. And although the Report (intentionally?) doesn't mention the source of this quotation, it was soon mentioned on some of the home ed lists that it was part of a ten point "Submission from the Church of England Education Division".
It took some doing, as the link on the available websites only produced encrypted documents, but eventually my much more computer literate husband managed to create a legible file for me (I have a pdf and a Word file, if anybody is interested) and I managed to copy the complete Submission into this post, at the end.

For the record, the fact that I copy it on here does not mean that this Submission represents my personal opinion (and this obviously especially goes for point 7).

May I draw your special attention to point 10?

==========
"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 may I now remind you of the first page in Mr Badman's Report, in which it says "the text in this document (......) may be reproduced (.....) providing it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context".

As a whole, I find the submission of the Church of England to be mostly sympathetic of Elective Home Education, with some points of concern, which I'd be delighted to discuss with them.
By only using point 7 Mr Badman has, in my opinion, taken part of the Submission out of its well balanced context, to give readers the impression that the Church of England is against Elective Home Education.

That's more than Bad. That's Evil.


Review of Elective Home Education
Submission from the Church of England Education Division

1. Church of England Education Division
   The Church of England Education Division is a provider of statutory education in over 4,500 Church of England primary schools and 220+ secondary schools and academies and of voluntary education and training of children and young people and adult learning.


2. We welcome the opportunity to contribute to the independent review of Elective Home Education. We believe in the absolute value of each child and young person as being made in the image of God, and that we have a responsibility to safeguard the vulnerable, whilst offering the freedom needed for growth and development.


3. We also believe in the importance of relationship within families and within communities, and that children and young people need to encounter a diverse range of people to enable them to learn to live in community and communion and to develop relationships outside their own family and close community.


4. Children and young people need to be equipped to challenge oppression and injustice and where they are the victims of such oppression and injustice and have no voice that is heard, the Church should be advocates for them.


5. As Christians, we cannot condone the use of home education as a cover for any form of child abuse. We are not aware of any research that shows how prevalent this is or whether it is widespread. Prevention of abuse under the cover of home education seems to be the main reason for this review, and in making it so, has the effect of tarnishing the reputation of the many parents who choose to home educate their children from the best of motives.


6. Parents are in the vast majority of cases the best people to decide what is appropriate and best for their children, and those who choose for whatever reason to educate their children outside the state or independent system do so for many reasons.


7. Our main concern about home education lies in (3) above: that children and young people not in formal education are missing the benefits and challenges of learning in community with their peers. Children who do not go to school may not experience the social and cultural diversity encountered there; they will not learn how to deal with the rough and tumble of everyday life; they may never meet people with different faith and values systems. All such encounters, even the difficult or painful ones, are enriching.


8. We are concerned not only with the five Every Child Matters outcomes, but also with the spiritual well-being of all children and young people. Spiritual well-being arises not only from being cared for in a loving family and/or in a faith community, but also in encounters with people of different opinions and backgrounds; in learning to listen to a variety of opinions; to encounter diversity and the riches and life-enhancement it can bring. Spiritual well-being depends on living and taking a full part in community life.


9. Children and young people in schools learn about and from the five major religions. This may be a difficult part of the curriculum for home educators to provide, yet it is vital for the Government’s community cohesion agenda that all children learn in a balanced way about the variety of religious values and practices, and to be encouraged to question their own beliefs and practices.


10. 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.
    
    
    
    Church of England Education Division
    February 2009