Some of you may remember that I posed a question some time ago regarding my 
14 yr old son who has Downs Syndrome and Autistic Spectrum disorder.

He attends a state special school for children with severe and profound 
learning difficulties.

His statement describes him as having no . In Part 3 of his Statement he is 
provided with full-time 1-to-1 at all time while in the care of the school 
( i.e. inc. break and lunch times).

Despite this he has managed to escape a number of times. Most of these 
escapes have been into adjoining farm land and for not more than 10 
minutes - so have not been a cause for any great alarm to us other than to 
be a mild source of annoyance at the clearly lax, inattentive, supervision 
by the 1-to-1.

As he has grown older he has grown bolder and more adventurous. I wrote to 
the school to warn them that he had escaped our supervision and put himself 
and others at risk and that they needed to keep a very close eye on him.

The day after I wrote to his school he escaped their control as his 1-to-1 
wasn't watching him. The school, which is located by a main 'A' road, has a 
dilapidated perimeter fence which incorporates a shared, ungated, 
access/exit point which anyone, public, staff or pupils may enter or leave 
by without being challenged or observed.

The school is unable to say how he left the school grounds.

He was missing for c.2.5 hours.

We have no idea what happened to him as he has little speech. There were no 
obvious marks on his body, though some time later he said "...a car came, 
touch, me lie down in road".

We are sick with worry at the thought of returning him to that school;
a) because of the very lax staff supervision and...
b) the lack of an effective perimeter fence

I cannot imagine any parent would want to gambol with the life of their 
child - though this is exactly the position we would be in if we sent our 
child back to this school.

The advice from this group, and indeed from our own legal advisors is that a 
claim for negligence would be very difficult, if not impossible to pursue, 
owing to the fact that he was not injured and that he suffered no loss.

We on the other hand have been put under intolerable strain, will have to 
incur expense in providing home education and care. And all because the LEA 
is unwilling to fence the school - something it knows very well it should 
have done years ago!

So, the problem is - what else can we do to make this intransigent and 
recalcitrant LEA take action?

Regards, H.

On Sep 22, 12:15 am, "H"  wrote:
>
> His statement describes him as having no . In Part 3 of his Statement he is
> provided with full-time 1-to-1 at all time while in the care of the school
> ( i.e. inc. break and lunch times).


What does it exactly say in Part 3, does it say that this 1 on 1 is to
prevent him from harming himself , absconding or simply to assist him
with the usual functions whilst taking a break or otherwise?

>
> Despite this he has managed to escape a number of times. Most of these
> escapes have been into adjoining farm land and for not more than 10
> minutes - so have not been a cause for any great alarm to us other than to
> be a mild source of annoyance at the clearly lax, inattentive, supervision
> by the 1-to-1.


Would the fist port of call not be with the school, assuming you have
already done this, the next step is alerting his doctor and seeking
advice on any medication which might be increased and/or replaced to
assist.

>
> As he has grown older he has grown bolder and more adventurous. I wrote to
> the school to warn them that he had escaped our supervision and put himself
> and others at risk and that they needed to keep a very close eye on him.

So you have first hand experience that he is difficult to curtail

>
> The day after I wrote to his school he escaped their control as his 1-to-1
> wasn't watching him. The school, which is located by a main 'A' road, has a
> dilapidated perimeter fence which incorporates a shared, ungated,
> access/exit point which anyone, public, staff or pupils may enter or leave
> by without being challenged or observed.


100% supervision is extremely difficult, and even if the supervision
does fall below 100%, that in itself might not in general amount to a
claim of negligence

>
> We are sick with worry at the thought of returning him to that school;
> a) because of the very lax staff supervision and...
> b) the lack of an effective perimeter fence

Can you not transfer him to alternative school? I am aware this would
need youto amend the statement, but if it is possible, it may put your
mind at ease


>
> The advice from this group, and indeed from our own legal advisors is that a
> claim for negligence would be very difficult, if not impossible to pursue> owing to the fact that he was not injured and that he suffered no loss.
>

But you could place the school and the LEA on a legal Notice that if
you (or more importantly your son) were to suffer damage which led to
loss because of a breach of a duty of care and make it very official,
then you would have the weapon to sue post any event.

I feel this is the only action you can take at this point. But if I
were you, i would seriously consider an alternative placement, if you
need help in proposing this I have a colleauge that deals in this area
of law, but she is not free - sorry.

"H"  wrote in message 
news:Dqidndfd6f80SUvVnZ2dneKdnZzinZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
> Some of you may remember that I posed a question some time ago regarding 
> my
> 14 yr old son who has Downs Syndrome and Autistic Spectrum disorder.
>
> He attends a state special school for children with severe and profound
> learning difficulties.
>
> His statement describes him as having no . In Part 3 of his Statement he 
> is
> provided with full-time 1-to-1 at all time while in the care of the school
> ( i.e. inc. break and lunch times).
>
> Despite this he has managed to escape a number of times. Most of these
> escapes have been into adjoining farm land and for not more than 10
> minutes - so have not been a cause for any great alarm to us other than to
> be a mild source of annoyance at the clearly lax, inattentive, supervision
> by the 1-to-1.
>
> As he has grown older he has grown bolder and more adventurous. I wrote to
> the school to warn them that he had escaped our supervision and put 
> himself
> and others at risk and that they needed to keep a very close eye on him.
>
> The day after I wrote to his school he escaped their control as his 1-to-1
> wasn't watching him. The school, which is located by a main 'A' road, has 
> a
> dilapidated perimeter fence which incorporates a shared, ungated,
> access/exit point which anyone, public, staff or pupils may enter or leave
> by without being challenged or observed.
>
> The school is unable to say how he left the school grounds.
>
> He was missing for c.2.5 hours.
>
> We have no idea what happened to him as he has little speech. There were 
> no
> obvious marks on his body, though some time later he said "...a car came,
> touch, me lie down in road".
>
> We are sick with worry at the thought of returning him to that school;
> a) because of the very lax staff supervision and...
> b) the lack of an effective perimeter fence
>
> I cannot imagine any parent would want to gambol with the life of their
> child - though this is exactly the position we would be in if we sent our
> child back to this school.
>
> The advice from this group, and indeed from our own legal advisors is that 
> a
> claim for negligence would be very difficult, if not impossible to pursue,
> owing to the fact that he was not injured and that he suffered no loss.
>
> We on the other hand have been put under intolerable strain, will have to
> incur expense in providing home education and care. And all because the 
> LEA
> is unwilling to fence the school - something it knows very well it should
> have done years ago!
>
> So, the problem is - what else can we do to make this intransigent and
> recalcitrant LEA take action?
>
> Regards, H.

You have solicitors. Have they anything to suggest?

One remedy is judicial review (proceedings in the Administrative Court) to 
compel the local authority to improve its procedures. That would be a rather 
expensive procedure which no solicitor is likely to accept under a 
conditional fee agreement. The local authority would probably use a silk 
(QC) to argue the case, and the costs could easily reach 30k.

It might be better to keep going with the correspondence and maybe if you 
definitely reach stalemate, see if the local authority ombudsman is willing 
to accept a complaint.

H wrote:

> The advice from this group, and indeed from our own legal advisors is
> that a claim for negligence would be very difficult, if not
> impossible to pursue, owing to the fact that he was not injured and
> that he suffered no loss.
>
> We on the other hand have been put under intolerable strain, will
> have to incur expense in providing home education and care. And all
> because the LEA is unwilling to fence the school - something it knows
> very well it should have done years ago!
>
> So, the problem is - what else can we do to make this intransigent and
> recalcitrant LEA take action?

I imagine that a fence capable of stopping a bold and adventurous teenager 
would have to be very substantial - not a cheap undertaking for school 
grounds with a large perimeter, and would doubtless compete with many other 
urgent resource demands (and might also be argued to present civil liberty 
issues).    It seems to me that improved supervision is the more practicable 
remedy, at least for as long as your son is responsive to instruction.

If you would prefer to avoid the expense and inconvenience of managing him 
in your home, then perhaps you could arrange to accompany & supervise him at 
school yourself until better arrangements have been made?    This would 
reduce your outlay for home cleaning costs and other burdens as mentioned in 
your earlier post, whilst ensuring that he is being supervised exactly as 
you would wish.

On Sep 22, 12:30 pm, "The Todal"  wrote:

>
> You have solicitors. Have they anything to suggest?
>
> One remedy is judicial review (proceedings in the Administrative Court) to
> compel the local authority to improve its procedures.

In general all other remedies would have to be exhausted first.

>That would be a rather
> expensive procedure which no solicitor is likely to accept under a
> conditional fee agreement. The local authority would probably use a silk
> (QC) to argue the case, and the costs could easily reach 30k.

Do costs follow the case in JR, i am not sure they do!

>
> It might be better to keep going with the correspondence and maybe if you
> definitely reach stalemate, see if the local authority ombudsman is willing
> to accept a complaint.-

LOL, there isn't one, there is of course SENDIST, but this procedure
is very prescriptive

On Sep 22, 8:50 pm, "Steve Walker"  wrote:

>
> If you would prefer to avoid the expense and inconvenience of managing him
> in your home, then perhaps you could arrange to accompany & supervise him at
> school yourself until better arrangements have been made?    This would
> reduce your outlay for home cleaning costs and other burdens as mentioned in
> your earlier post, whilst ensuring that he is being supervised exactly as
> you would wish.

For H&S and/or insurance reasons (excuses), parental intervention at
this level is not welcomed and in some institutions (schools) not
permitted.

>
> It might be better to keep going with the correspondence and maybe if you
> definitely reach stalemate, see if the local authority ombudsman is willing
> to accept a complaint.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

To go to the Ombudsman you have to have exhausted the LA complaints
procedure.

If the school won't play ball escalate the complaint in writing to the
LEA as a stage one formal complaint. All local authorities have a
complaints officer who is indepedent of teh individual departments.

If they try to fob you off by sending you back to the school, write to
the Ombudsman saying that you have written to the LEA and they are
attempting to subvert the complaints procedure, send with it a copy of
your "formal" complaint.

The Ombudsman will write to the LA about the letter, the LA will tell
the Ombudsman that they haven't had the opportunity to deal with
it...but will now do so.

You will get a letter from teh Ombudsman saying that they cannot get
involved "until" the LA complaints procedure has been exhausted, but
that it you don't get satisfaction get back in touch.

The LA get about a month to resolve teh complaint.

The LA complaints procedure is laid down by government and stage one
is to have a meeting to resolve the difficulties. Make sure you go to
such a meeting with all your evidence, prefereably you set the agenda,
give a written submission to discuss and lay down a time limit for an
acceptable response, make sure your time limit is "reasonable".

If you don't get a response within your reasonable time limit (allow
them a month) write to the LA and tell them that you now want a stage
two complaint, with an independent investigator. Give them 14 days to
respond.

They "cannot refuse", if they do then write back to teh Ombudsman
saying that they are failing to comply withthe statutory complaints
procedure.

Stage Two means you get an independent person investigating and its
usually, a solicitor, part time judge or similar.
Make sure you have all your facts at this point.

teh independent investigator will write a report with recommendations
that are then put to the LA for comment and actioning. Not many LA's
will refuse to abide by teh recommendations.

If you are not happy with the outcome you go to stage 3 which is
usually a complaints revue panel which is generally made up from local
councillors and and someone who heads the panel. They will review
everything and make recommendations.

If you are still unhappy with teh outcome you can then go to teh
Ombudsman who has supposedly the same powers as the courts.

I have never had to go further than the Ombudsman, but i understand
that the next stage from that is asking for a Judicial Review.

Whenever the council try to delay things write back to the Ombudsman
about them attempting to subvert the complaints procedure, this is
because it every stage is time limited. You can "also" raise a sparate
complaint about failing to comply with the statutory complaints
procedure.



http://www.lgo.org.uk/complain.htm

You can raise a complaint about failing to meet assessed needs.

"IF" you really want to put a rocket up their ???? write a letter to
the Health and Safety Executive saying that the lack of an adequate
fence is a breach of the Health and Safety because its a special
school and send a copy of this letter to the LEA.

Research the Disability Discrimination Act, which sounds bizarre as
you are talking about a special school, but your son has a right "not
to be disadvantaged by his disability" - it sounds to me that he "is"
being disadvantaged because you can't send him to school. Contact your
local "equality and human rights commision" office and get them to
fight your case. This used to be the Disability Rights Commision.

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/pages/contactus.aspx


In theory you don't need a solicitor to pursue matters through the
statutory complaints procedure and with teh Ombudsman, but in reality
you need specialist legal knowledge and its unfair because the council
"will" use their legal beagles to fight their side. But it is possible
to get results. If you do resort to legal advice don't expect to get
your costs back even if it goes to teh Omdudsman and don't expect
compensation because they don't like dishing out public money.

smithy

See below

 wrote in message 
news:3d56d258-e262-4f79-8049-caa2c7b2f2d7@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 22, 12:15 am, "H"  wrote:
>
>> His statement describes him as having no . In Part 3 of his Statement he 
>> is
>> provided with full-time 1-to-1 at all time while in the care of the 
>> school
>> ( i.e. inc. break and lunch times).


>What does it exactly say in Part 3, does it say that this 1 on 1 is to
>prevent him from harming himself , absconding or simply to assist him
>with the usual functions whilst taking a break or otherwise?

Part 2 says...His ability to be self-sufficient in the community is poor. 
This relates to road safety issues, proficiency in communicating and basic 
mathematical competencies. He is at risk of running away when not 
supervised.

Part  3, Provision 1, to meet all objectives - says...A learning environment 
within which all staff are aware of his tendency to run off, hurt others or 
to enter prohibited areas and will make trained intervention to enable his 
safe access to the learning environment.

Part 3, Provision 6,...A learning environment within which all staff are 
aware of his tendency to run off,
hurt others or to enter prohibited areas and will make trained intervention 
to enable his safe access to the learning environment.

Part 3 Provision 12,...X will have full access to the National Curriculum. 
It will be adapted and differentiated to take account of his special 
educational needs, as a pupil who has Down's Syndrome, with an associated 
language delay and who can sometimes demonstrate challenging behavior and 
modified on an in-house basis to ensure the maximum flexibility and 
attention to his academic and personal development.
X needs substantial educational and behavioral understanding and one-to-one 
full-time support whilst in the care and control of the school. This will 
include support during lessons, break times, lunch times, school based after 
school
activities or any out of school activity organised by or on behalf of the 
school. All support for X should be of the highest standard. This support 
should be discreet, unobtrusive, but extremely alert to Xs' needs. It should 
be sensitive
to Xs' need to develop independence and self-help skills. Staff should be 
careful in their interpretation of Xs' spoken communication.



>>
>> Despite this he has managed to escape a number of times. Most of these
>> escapes have been into adjoining farm land and for not more than 10
>> minutes - so have not been a cause for any great alarm to us other than 
>> to
>> be a mild source of annoyance at the clearly lax, inattentive, 
>> supervision
>> by the 1-to-1.


>Would the fist port of call not be with the school, assuming you have
>already done this, the next step is alerting his doctor and seeking
>advice on any medication which might be increased and/or replaced to
>assist.

Why would I be rushing off to a doctor when his behaviour and needs are 
clearly described and defined in his statement?

>> As he has grown older he has grown bolder and more adventurous. I wrote 
>> to
>> the school to warn them that he had escaped our supervision and put 
>> himself
>> and others at risk and that they needed to keep a very close eye on him.

>So you have first hand experience that he is difficult to curtail.

Yes, as described in his statement! And which we remineded the school about.

>> The day after I wrote to his school he escaped their control as his 
>> 1-to-1
>> wasn't watching him. The school, which is located by a main 'A' road, has 
>> a
>> dilapidated perimeter fence which incorporates a shared, ungated,
>> access/exit point which anyone, public, staff or pupils may enter or 
>> leave
> by without being challenged or observed.


>100% supervision is extremely difficult, and even if the supervision
>does fall below 100%, that in itself might not in general amount to a
>claim of negligence

Of course 100% supervision is difficult - which is why there shoulkd be 
effective secondary measures - viz. an effective perimiter fence.

>> We are sick with worry at the thought of returning him to that school;
>> a) because of the very lax staff supervision and...
>> b) the lack of an effective perimeter fence

>Can you not transfer him to alternative school? I am aware this would
>need you to amend the statement, but if it is possible, it may put your
>mind at ease

It appears most schools take this lax approach - though some are better that 
others. He is already in an out-of-county school. The school needs to 
recognise the type of pupils it is set up to accept - and cater for them 
appropriatly. At the moment the school fails miserably in that. The only 
other option is to send him miles away to a bording school which would cost 
the LEA an absolute fortune.

>> The advice from this group, and indeed from our own legal advisors is 
>> that a
>> claim for negligence would be very difficult, if not impossible to 
>> pursue,
>> owing to the fact that he was not injured and that he suffered no loss.
>>

>But you could place the school and the LEA on a legal Notice that if
>you (or more importantly your son) were to suffer damage which led to
>loss because of a breach of a duty of care and make it very official,
>then you would have the weapon to sue post any event.

I have already done that - but would you want to send your child back 
knowing the conditions exist which would allow a similar event to occur 
again but if s/he was 'damaged' you have a good legal position? Or would you 
want 'reasonable' effective security installed before returning  her/him AND 
know that the law will support a practicle approach to safety.

>I feel this is the only action you can take at this point. But if I
>were you, i would seriously consider an alternative placement, if you
>need help in proposing this I have a colleauge that deals in this area
>of law, but she is not free - sorry.

Thank you for your help. I do have an advisor. The problem is for me is 
trying to work out how I can use the law to bring about change to a system 
that is flawed.

"Steve Walker"  wrote in message 
news:6jqb1hF4ih8mU1@mid.individual.net...
>H wrote:
>
>> The advice from this group, and indeed from our own legal advisors is
>> that a claim for negligence would be very difficult, if not
>> impossible to pursue, owing to the fact that he was not injured and
>> that he suffered no loss.
>>
>> We on the other hand have been put under intolerable strain, will
>> have to incur expense in providing home education and care. And all
>> because the LEA is unwilling to fence the school - something it knows
>> very well it should have done years ago!
>>
>> So, the problem is - what else can we do to make this intransigent and
>> recalcitrant LEA take action?
>
> I imagine that a fence capable of stopping a bold and adventurous teenager
> would have to be very substantial - not a cheap undertaking for school
> grounds with a large perimeter, and would doubtless compete with many 
> other
> urgent resource demands (and might also be argued to present civil liberty
> issues).    It seems to me that improved supervision is the more 
> practicable
> remedy, at least for as long as your son is responsive to instruction.

Why should I expect everything to be a 'cheap' undertaking? I expect 
whatever the school does to be 'appropriate' and 'effective'. However, I 
agree it will not be inexpensive, though not that much more than was 
originally installed, but allowed to fall into a state disrepair.

I can only assume you have little idea of what SEVERE and PROFOUND LEARNING 
DIFFICULTIES means.
There are many bold and adventurous children at this school. Clearly, 
'Supervision' can fail, and yes, I understand a fence can fail too - but it 
needs to be in place and be resonably effective in the first place! In this 
case perimiter 'security' is virtualy non-existent. Other children have 
absconded from the school. Luckily, none have been hurt. The school is 
destined to take more disabled children than it has in the past, so as time 
goes on - it is only a matter of time before a child is 'damaged'!

> If you would prefer to avoid the expense and inconvenience of managing him
> in your home, then perhaps you could arrange to accompany & supervise him 
> at
> school yourself until better arrangements have been made?    This would
> reduce your outlay for home cleaning costs and other burdens as mentioned 
> in
> your earlier post, whilst ensuring that he is being supervised exactly as
> you would wish.

Really, would you want to stop whatever it is you do during your day in 
order to look after your child?
Simply because the school has not installed appropriate security!

H.

warning - this reply is a top post.

I have in the past successfully appealed to the LGO - so I'm aware of the 
difficulties involved. It's one of the reasons why I would prefer for an 
alternative legal remedy - preferably a negligence claim - as that is the 
root of the problem.

However, if all else fails that's what I'll do.

H.

"smithy"  wrote in message 
news:cb4e6243-1459-4c81-b502-c803a0ca35be@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>>
>> It might be better to keep going with the correspondence and maybe if you
>> definitely reach stalemate, see if the local authority ombudsman is 
>> willing
>> to accept a complaint.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> To go to the Ombudsman you have to have exhausted the LA complaints
> procedure.
>
> If the school won't play ball escalate the complaint in writing to the
> LEA as a stage one formal complaint. All local authorities have a
> complaints officer who is indepedent of teh individual departments.
>
> If they try to fob you off by sending you back to the school, write to
> the Ombudsman saying that you have written to the LEA and they are
> attempting to subvert the complaints procedure, send with it a copy of
> your "formal" complaint.
>
> The Ombudsman will write to the LA about the letter, the LA will tell
> the Ombudsman that they haven't had the opportunity to deal with
> it...but will now do so.
>
> You will get a letter from teh Ombudsman saying that they cannot get
> involved "until" the LA complaints procedure has been exhausted, but
> that it you don't get satisfaction get back in touch.
>
> The LA get about a month to resolve teh complaint.
>
> The LA complaints procedure is laid down by government and stage one
> is to have a meeting to resolve the difficulties. Make sure you go to
> such a meeting with all your evidence, prefereably you set the agenda,
> give a written submission to discuss and lay down a time limit for an
> acceptable response, make sure your time limit is "reasonable".
>
> If you don't get a response within your reasonable time limit (allow
> them a month) write to the LA and tell them that you now want a stage
> two complaint, with an independent investigator. Give them 14 days to
> respond.
>
> They "cannot refuse", if they do then write back to teh Ombudsman
> saying that they are failing to comply withthe statutory complaints
> procedure.
>
> Stage Two means you get an independent person investigating and its
> usually, a solicitor, part time judge or similar.
> Make sure you have all your facts at this point.
>
> teh independent investigator will write a report with recommendations
> that are then put to the LA for comment and actioning. Not many LA's
> will refuse to abide by teh recommendations.
>
> If you are not happy with the outcome you go to stage 3 which is
> usually a complaints revue panel which is generally made up from local
> councillors and and someone who heads the panel. They will review
> everything and make recommendations.
>
> If you are still unhappy with teh outcome you can then go to teh
> Ombudsman who has supposedly the same powers as the courts.
>
> I have never had to go further than the Ombudsman, but i understand
> that the next stage from that is asking for a Judicial Review.
>
> Whenever the council try to delay things write back to the Ombudsman
> about them attempting to subvert the complaints procedure, this is
> because it every stage is time limited. You can "also" raise a sparate
> complaint about failing to comply with the statutory complaints
> procedure.
>
>
>
> http://www.lgo.org.uk/complain.htm
>
> You can raise a complaint about failing to meet assessed needs.
>
> "IF" you really want to put a rocket up their ???? write a letter to
> the Health and Safety Executive saying that the lack of an adequate
> fence is a breach of the Health and Safety because its a special
> school and send a copy of this letter to the LEA.
>
> Research the Disability Discrimination Act, which sounds bizarre as
> you are talking about a special school, but your son has a right "not
> to be disadvantaged by his disability" - it sounds to me that he "is"
> being disadvantaged because you can't send him to school. Contact your
> local "equality and human rights commision" office and get them to
> fight your case. This used to be the Disability Rights Commision.
>
> http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/pages/contactus.aspx
>
>
> In theory you don't need a solicitor to pursue matters through the
> statutory complaints procedure and with teh Ombudsman, but in reality
> you need specialist legal knowledge and its unfair because the council
> "will" use their legal beagles to fight their side. But it is possible
> to get results. If you do resort to legal advice don't expect to get
> your costs back even if it goes to teh Omdudsman and don't expect
> compensation because they don't like dishing out public money.
>
> smithy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On Sep 22, 10:15 pm, "H"  wrote:
> warning - this reply is a top post.
>
> I have in the past successfully appealed to the LGO - so I'm aware of the
> difficulties involved. It's one of the reasons why I would prefer for an
> alternative legal remedy - preferably a negligence claim - as that is the
> root of the problem.
>
> However, if all else fails that's what I'll do.
>
> H.
>
> "smithy"  wrote in message
>
> news:cb4e6243-1459-4c81-b502-c803a0ca35be@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> >> It might be better to keep going with the correspondence and maybe if you
> >> definitely reach stalemate, see if the local authority ombudsman is
> >> willing
> >> to accept a complaint.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > To go to the Ombudsman you have to have exhausted the LA complaints
> > procedure.
>
> > If the school won't play ball escalate the complaint in writing to the
> > LEA as a stage one formal complaint. All local authorities have a
> > complaints officer who is indepedent of teh individual departments.
>
> > If they try to fob you off by sending you back to the school, write to
> > the Ombudsman saying that you have written to the LEA and they are
> > attempting to subvert the complaints procedure, send with it a copy of
> > your "formal" complaint.
>
> > The Ombudsman will write to the LA about the letter, the LA will tell
> > the Ombudsman that they haven't had the opportunity to deal with
> > it...but will now do so.
>
> > You will get a letter from teh Ombudsman saying that they cannot get
> > involved "until" the LA complaints procedure has been exhausted, but
> > that it you don't get satisfaction get back in touch.
>
> > The LA get about a month to resolve teh complaint.
>
> > The LA complaints procedure is laid down by government and stage one
> > is to have a meeting to resolve the difficulties. Make sure you go to
> > such a meeting with all your evidence, prefereably you set the agenda,
> > give a written submission to discuss and lay down a time limit for an
> > acceptable response, make sure your time limit is "reasonable".
>
> > If you don't get a response within your reasonable time limit (allow
> > them a month) write to the LA and tell them that you now want a stage
> > two complaint, with an independent investigator. Give them 14 days to
> > respond.
>
> > They "cannot refuse", if they do then write back to teh Ombudsman
> > saying that they are failing to comply withthe statutory complaints
> > procedure.
>
> > Stage Two means you get an independent person investigating and its
> > usually, a solicitor, part time judge or similar.
> > Make sure you have all your facts at this point.
>
> > teh independent investigator will write a report with recommendations
> > that are then put to the LA for comment and actioning. Not many LA's
> > will refuse to abide by teh recommendations.
>
> > If you are not happy with the outcome you go to stage 3 which is
> > usually a complaints revue panel which is generally made up from local
> > councillors and and someone who heads the panel. They will review
> > everything and make recommendations.
>
> > If you are still unhappy with teh outcome you can then go to teh
> > Ombudsman who has supposedly the same powers as the courts.
>
> > I have never had to go further than the Ombudsman, but i understand
> > that the next stage from that is asking for a Judicial Review.
>
> > Whenever the council try to delay things write back to the Ombudsman
> > about them attempting to subvert the complaints procedure, this is
> > because it every stage is time limited. You can "also" raise a sparate
> > complaint about failing to comply with the statutory complaints
> > procedure.
>
> >http://www.lgo.org.uk/complain.htm
>
> > You can raise a complaint about failing to meet assessed needs.
>
> > "IF" you really want to put a rocket up their ???? write a letter to
> > the Health and Safety Executive saying that the lack of an adequate
> > fence is a breach of the Health and Safety because its a special
> > school and send a copy of this letter to the LEA.
>
> > Research the Disability Discrimination Act, which sounds bizarre as
> > you are talking about a special school, but your son has a right "not
> > to be disadvantaged by his disability" - it sounds to me that he "is"
> > being disadvantaged because you can't send him to school. Contact your
> > local "equality and human rights commision" office and get them to
> > fight your case. This used to be the Disability Rights Commision.
>
> >http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/pages/contactus.aspx
>
> > In theory you don't need a solicitor to pursue matters through the
> > statutory complaints procedure and with teh Ombudsman, but in reality
> > you need specialist legal knowledge and its unfair because the council
> > "will" use their legal beagles to fight their side. But it is possible
> > to get results. If you do resort to legal advice don't expect to get
> > your costs back even if it goes to teh Omdudsman and don't expect
> > compensation because they don't like dishing out public money.
>
> > smithy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The problem is that with ALL public sector organisations they have
alternatives to the courts that supposedly eliminates the expense of
legal representation. The other thing to consider is that most things
revolve around what is "reasonable" and there will always be the
element of 1:1 supervision failing due to a momentary lapse in
attention and that cannot be legislated for.

smithy

"smithy"  wrote in message 
news:fe86f3ae-f26f-4717-ae53-ca0b92f5550f@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
....BIG SNIP...

> > "IF" you really want to put a rocket up their ???? write a letter to
> > the Health and Safety Executive saying that the lack of an adequate
> > fence is a breach of the Health and Safety because its a special
> > school and send a copy of this letter to the LEA.

I copied my complaint to the LEA, HSE and Sec. of State.

LEA naturaly say they have complied. HSE investigated and say no case to 
answer. The LEa provided what purports to be the HSE investigation report. I 
think it was acrually written by an LEA H&S officer. It is riddled with 
mistakes and assumptions and is the reason for a complaint to the HSE 
complaints dept about their investigation. Sec of State says, in short, they 
follow HSE and LEA advice.

> > Research the Disability Discrimination Act, which sounds bizarre as
> > you are talking about a special school, but your son has a right "not
> > to be disadvantaged by his disability" - it sounds to me that he "is"
> > being disadvantaged because you can't send him to school. Contact your
> > local "equality and human rights commision" office and get them to
> > fight your case. This used to be the Disability Rights Commision.

Yes, I'm looking into this.
>
> >http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/pages/contactus.aspx
>
> > In theory you don't need a solicitor to pursue matters through the
> > statutory complaints procedure and with teh Ombudsman, but in reality
> > you need specialist legal knowledge and its unfair because the council
> > "will" use their legal beagles to fight their side. But it is possible
> > to get results. If you do resort to legal advice don't expect to get
> > your costs back even if it goes to teh Omdudsman and don't expect
> > compensation because they don't like dishing out public money.
>
> > smithy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

>The problem is that with ALL public sector organisations they have
>alternatives to the courts that supposedly eliminates the expense of
>legal representation.

Ah yes, like that fun, educational game - SEN 'statementing'...it sure 
taught me a thing or two!!

>The other thing to consider is that most things
>revolve around what is "reasonable" and there will always be the
>element of 1:1 supervision failing due to a momentary lapse in
>attention and that cannot be legislated for.

My whole argument is about being 'reasonable' and having a fall-back system 
for when supervision fails - its called a fence! To me this arguing about 
fencing of a special needs school is tantamount to mental torture. It is of 
such blindingly obvious necessity that only the most obtuse, obstructive and 
perverse individual would want to argue otherwise. It just never fails to 
amaze me how many such people there are - and why they all seem to be 
employed by Governmental organisations!

>smithy

On Sep 22, 10:15 pm, "H"  wrote:
> Thank you for your help. I do have an advisor. The problem is for me is
> trying to work out how I can use the law to bring about change to a system
> that is flawed.

Have you contacted your local MP?

On Sep 22, 10:15 pm, "H"  wrote:

>
> Really, would you want to stop whatever it is you do during your day in
> order to look after your child?
> Simply because the school has not installed appropriate security!
>

Have you spoken to other parents of the children at the school, if so,
I am sure they mirror your concerns, why do you not have a collective
voice. That may bring  about the result you desire.

Are you sure the fence is just the issue?

> Why should I expect everything to be a 'cheap' undertaking? I expect 
> whatever the school does to be 'appropriate' and 'effective'. However, I 
> agree it will not be inexpensive, though not that much more than was 
> originally installed, but allowed to fall into a state disrepair.

 From what little I know about fencing suppliers, they are significantly 
cheaper than lawyers.

I can't help feeling that if you spent the money you've been spending on 
legal fees on repairing the fence this could be resolved, and the 
education budget could be spend on education rather than lawyers.

For context, the entire capital budget for science at a secondary school 
near me was £500 this year, or about half a day of cheap lawyer time.

On Sep 23, 12:40 am, "H"  wrote:

>
> My whole argument is about being 'reasonable' and having a fall-back system
> for when supervision fails - its called a fence! To me this arguing about
> fencing of a special needs school is tantamount to mental torture. It is of
> such blindingly obvious necessity that only the most obtuse, obstructive and
> perverse individual would want to argue otherwise. It just never fails to
> amaze me how many such people there are - and why they all seem to be
> employed by Governmental organisations!

To be fair on those that you berate, ultimately it comes down to
funding, every LEA in the country are told to make a 10% year or year
saving, and as such in the grand scheme of things a fence that you
deem as inadequate while other pertinent goverment agencies consider
it fit for purpose takes its place in the list of "to do's" as fairly
low down the page.

My son goes to a special needs school and at this school there is a
PTA, this group run Summer Fates and quiz nights etc to riase funds
for such issues that you are concerned with (ie a fence). If there is
not a PTA at your son's school, why dont you expend your energy in
doing something positive and form one. If there is one already, get
fund raising and replace the fence yourselves, just think of the
legacy you would leave behind when your son leaves, and you would feel
good about achieving something, rather then bitter for not ever
winning against the LEA. Don't take the moral high ground where your
son is concerned - Do what is best for him!!

janemcdoe@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> On Sep 23, 12:40 am, "H"  wrote:
>
>>
>> My whole argument is about being 'reasonable' and having a fall-back
>> system for when supervision fails - its called a fence! To me this
>> arguing about fencing of a special needs school is tantamount to
>> mental torture. It is of such blindingly obvious necessity that only
>> the most obtuse, obstructive and perverse individual would want to
>> argue otherwise. It just never fails to amaze me how many such
>> people there are - and why they all seem to be employed by
>> Governmental organisations!
>
> To be fair on those that you berate, ultimately it comes down to
> funding, every LEA in the country are told to make a 10% year or year
> saving, and as such in the grand scheme of things a fence that you
> deem as inadequate while other pertinent goverment agencies consider
> it fit for purpose takes its place in the list of "to do's" as fairly
> low down the page.
>
> My son goes to a special needs school and at this school there is a
> PTA, this group run Summer Fates and quiz nights etc to riase funds
> for such issues that you are concerned with (ie a fence). If there is
> not a PTA at your son's school, why dont you expend your energy in
> doing something positive and form one. If there is one already, get
> fund raising and replace the fence yourselves, just think of the
> legacy you would leave behind when your son leaves, and you would feel
> good about achieving something, rather then bitter for not ever
> winning against the LEA. Don't take the moral high ground where your
> son is concerned - Do what is best for him!!

I agree that if the school accepts that the fence needs 
replacing/strengthening, it would make good economic sense to offer a 
donation to ensure this is done.  It isn't an option to turn up with your 
own fencing and fenceposts (with or without help from other parents) and do 
it yourselves, because no school or local authority would feel able to 
accept a DIY job.

There might be a pedant at the local authority who says "if we agree to do 
this work it will set a precedent that might apply to other schools so we 
can't agree to it" but if so, you'd have to deal with that by careful 
diplomacy. If the head teacher isn't on your side you need to do your best 
to change that.

On Sep 23, 12:25 pm, "The Todal"  wrote:

>
> There might be a pedant at the local authority who says "if we agree to do
> this work it will set a precedent that might apply to other schools so we
> can't agree to it" but if so, you'd have to deal with that by careful
> diplomacy. If the head teacher isn't on your side you need to do your best
> to change that

I feel the school, the board of Governors and the LEA would work
together in order to find a way, if there were such an impediment.

>
> There might be a pedant at the local authority who says "if we agree to do
> this work it will set a precedent that might apply to other schools so we
> can't agree to it" but if so, you'd have to deal with that by careful
> diplomacy. If the head teacher isn't on your side you need to do your best
> to change that.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Getting the head teacher on side is a good way forward.

Although my son wasn't struggling enough to need statementing he did
need extra support, the head teacher at his school had a reputation
for distancing herself from parents. However, i found her to be very
cooperative when it came to the school and myself working together to
resolve my son's difficulties.

At a later date when my disabilities caused massive disruption to my
children's lives the head teacher was very supportive of me when it
came to dealing with other agencies.

My children's school was a church school but it had a very active PTA
and they raised funds for major works refurbishing the school grounds.
Also they had parents actively involved in doing voluntary work with
children that needed extra support.

Over the years i have had to strike a balance between working with the
various agencies and taking action through the satutory complaints
procedure to secure services. I had always worked in the private
sector and it took a while to get used to teh fact that public
organisations are not able to work to the standards that the
politicians like to think they can. They just don't have the resources
to keep up with the massive changes demanded over the last few years.


smithy

janemcdoe@hotmail.co.uk wrote:

> To be fair on those that you berate, ultimately it comes down to
> funding, every LEA in the country are told to make a 10% year or year
> saving, and as such in the grand scheme of things a fence that you
> deem as inadequate while other pertinent goverment agencies consider
> it fit for purpose takes its place in the list of "to do's" as fairly
> low down the page.
>
> My son goes to a special needs school and at this school there is a
> PTA, this group run Summer Fates and quiz nights etc to riase funds
> for such issues that you are concerned with (ie a fence). If there is
> not a PTA at your son's school, why dont you expend your energy in
> doing something positive and form one. If there is one already, get
> fund raising and replace the fence yourselves, just think of the
> legacy you would leave behind when your son leaves, and you would feel
> good about achieving something, rather then bitter for not ever
> winning against the LEA. Don't take the moral high ground where your
> son is concerned - Do what is best for him!!

That's probably the best suggestion so far - positive action will also draw 
in support from councillors and local press, and maybe a fencing contractor 
offering a good price for PR too.




-- 
Criticising the government is not illegal, but on investigation often
turns out to be linked to other offences

H wrote:
> "Steve Walker"  wrote in message
> news:6jqb1hF4ih8mU1@mid.individual.net...
>> H wrote:

> I can only assume you have little idea of what SEVERE and PROFOUND
> LEARNING DIFFICULTIES means.

Then you would assume wrongly, but that's not really the point.

>> If you would prefer to avoid the expense and inconvenience of
>> managing him in your home, then perhaps you could arrange to
>> accompany & supervise him at
>> school yourself until better arrangements have been made?    This
>> would reduce your outlay for home cleaning costs and other burdens
>> as mentioned in
>> your earlier post, whilst ensuring that he is being supervised
>> exactly as you would wish.
>
> Really, would you want to stop whatever it is you do during your day
> in order to look after your child?


Yes, I can see what you mean now.   What sort of crazy world do we live in 
when parents might have to interrupt their busy lives to look after their 
own children...?

I really don't wish to make light of your troubles, but ultimately you 
sometimes have to accept what's on offer or else make your own arrangements. 
State facilities might be improved by a little nagging and persuading, but 
never as much as we might wish.   Budgets are practically fixed, but demands 
(from every sector of education, health & social care) are growing rapidly.

I'm not just arguing for the sake of it, H.   My family has faced similar 
hard choices over the years  -  at various times we've home-schooled our 
children, brought dying relatives home from shabby, overcrowded hospitals, 
and shepherded incontinent grannies through their final years.  I'm not 
claiming anything special here - I just grew up with it that way, so I 
inherited those values of self-reliance and family-first.   I sincerely hope 
that you also find a solution that works for your family.

wrote in message
news:4d79dd2c-d602-4e0d-90c1-4f9828c46381@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 23, 12:40 am, "H"  wrote:

>>
>> My whole argument is about being 'reasonable' and having a fall-back
>> system
> >for when supervision fails - its called a fence! To me this arguing about
> >fencing of a special needs school is tantamount to mental torture. It is
> >of
> >such blindingly obvious necessity that only the most obtuse, obstructive
> >and
> >perverse individual would want to argue otherwise. It just never fails to
> >amaze me how many such people there are - and why they all seem to be
> >employed by Governmental organisations!

>To be fair on those that you berate, ultimately it comes down to
>funding, every LEA in the country are told to make a 10% year or year
>saving, and as such in the grand scheme of things a fence that you
>deem as inadequate while other pertinent government agencies consider
>it fit for purpose takes its place in the list of "to do's" as fairly
>low down the page.

Well if I were to believe you assertion of a 10% year-on-year saving, we can
look forward to the day when councils will have reduced the bill to
practically zero.

Of course if they really did make savings of that magnitude there wouldn't
be any need for increased input from government.

It is a patent nonsense to seriously consider this position. Can you tell me
what the point of earning an income is if you are, year-on-year, required to
spend less of it?

We live in a continually developing and evolving society and local
authorities, like the people they serve, are part of this process. Stop
money flowing and the system chokes - you're seeing it on the news every
day.

Clearly then, councils need not so much to stop spending - but to spend
wisely and for the social good. Schools serve the community and the
community as a whole need to contribute to the schools. School security
should be a matter of national policy and therefore the local authority
should meet the 'national' standard from its rates (or whatever they are
called these days) for that is what the community should be entitled to
expect for its money

>My son goes to a special needs school and at this school there is a
>PTA, this group run Summer Fates and quiz nights etc to raise funds
>for such issues that you are concerned with (ie a fence). If there is
>not a PTA at your son's school, why don't you expend your energy in
>doing something positive and form one.

PTAs of the average mainstream, maintained, school might raise between £5k
and £10k a year - but certainly not enough to fence it. Private schools
might set their sights considerably higher! Indeed I know of one that wanted
to raise £1m over 3 years for a new hall - I have a feeling that the
employment 'bonus' of some of the parents went a considerable way to
realising that ambition much earlier than anticipated.

Special school PTAs, as a rule, raise considerably less because they have 
far
fewer pupils, parents are often on low incomes have low IQ's themselves, and 
finally there's
much less local support for special schools.

I think our PTA managed to raise c.£3K last year. So, based on a current 
estimated cost of c. £100k for
the fence, my son could look forward to being protected when he reaches 48!

Much as I might like to live in the idyllic world you describe, where happy
philanthropists stuff great bales of the blue folding stuff into your
tombola in the hope of wining a bottle of the best Rumanian wine Sainsbury's
have to offer - I have to make do with the real world!

>If there is one already, get
>fund raising and replace the fence yourselves, just think of the
>legacy you would leave behind when your son leaves,

I am more concerned at my son being around long enough for him to receive a 
legacy of any sort!

> and you would feel
>good about achieving something, rather then bitter for not ever
>winning against the LEA.

I don't intend to feel bitter about not winning. I aim to feel satisfied and 
contented, though I anticipate a dash of peevishness as time goes on.

>Don't take the moral high ground where your
>son is concerned - Do what is best for him!!

As to the 'moral high ground' - I've neither time or money to afford it. The
only grounds I want are safe school grounds - ASAP!

Creating a legally enforceable judgement IS what's best for him.
Anything else would be to pin my hopes on others 'good intentions'.

Surely it would be better for the LEA to 'fess up and fence up now, rather
than engage in long litigious battles over something that, in the common
sense 'basic' stakes, ranks on a par with putting a fire guard in front of 
an
open fire when children are around.

I've had an even better idea though than PTA fund-raising just to buy a 
fence...
....why don't we get everyone in our locality to chip in to build, equip,
staff and maintain a special school with a fence - we could call the venture
'community charge'! What? someone's thought of it? Damn! You'll be telling 
me
next that Local Authorities already do this!

H.

"Steve Walker"  wrote in message 
news:6jt04gF50qeqU1@mid.individual.net...
>H wrote:
>> "Steve Walker"  wrote in message
>> news:6jqb1hF4ih8mU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> H wrote:
>
>> I can only assume you have little idea of what SEVERE and PROFOUND
>> LEARNING DIFFICULTIES means.
>
> Then you would assume wrongly, but that's not really the point.
>
>>> If you would prefer to avoid the expense and inconvenience of
>>> managing him in your home, then perhaps you could arrange to
>>> accompany & supervise him at
>>> school yourself until better arrangements have been made?    This
>>> would reduce your outlay for home cleaning costs and other burdens
>>> as mentioned in
>>> your earlier post, whilst ensuring that he is being supervised
>>> exactly as you would wish.
>>
>> Really, would you want to stop whatever it is you do during your day
>> in order to look after your child?
>
>
> Yes, I can see what you mean now.   What sort of crazy world do we live in
> when parents might have to interrupt their busy lives to look after their
> own children...?
>
> I really don't wish to make light of your troubles, but ultimately you
> sometimes have to accept what's on offer or else make your own 
> arrangements.
> State facilities might be improved by a little nagging and persuading, but
> never as much as we might wish.

Oh come on - State facilities are only ever improved by nagging!!

 >  Budgets are practically fixed, but demands
> (from every sector of education, health & social care) are growing 
> rapidly.

Budgets are never 'practically' fixed - they are 'arbitrarily' fixed to meet 
someones agenda - generally those who shout loudest and longest.

> I'm not just arguing for the sake of it, H.

Hmm...I'm arguing for a sensible approach to safety, of the sort that's on a 
par with putting a fire guard in front of a fire where young children are 
gathered. You are, in essence, arguing against that. Frankly, I think either 
you must like arguing or you have little/no real understanding of the 
problem - I suspect the latter.

> My family has faced similar
> hard choices over the years  -  at various times we've home-schooled our
> children, brought dying relatives home from shabby, overcrowded hospitals,
> and shepherded incontinent grannies through their final years.  I'm not
> claiming anything special here - I just grew up with it that way, so I
> inherited those values of self-reliance and family-first.   I sincerely 
> hope
> that you also find a solution that works for your family.

Yes, we have a similar T-shirt too. However, looking at what you've written, 
the difference between us appears to be that while you will take your 
relative home from hospital - I would take mine home AND campaign for an 
improvement in hospitals. The actuality is my father-in-law died in hospital 
from an MRSA hospital acquired infection and the campaigning was done at the 
inquest.

That's what I'm doing now. I have my son at home, and though I am NOT 'home 
educating' him I am ensuring he is receiving an education AND I am 
campaigning to have the state of affairs that led to this changed.

I do not subscribe to this 'not enough money in the kitty' baloney. Funds 
can be made available. Even if all the schools in the UK were fenced it 
would still only be the equivalent of a teaspoon out of the bucket we use to 
pour money into the war budget or bailing banks out for lending policies 
which in my view verge on criminal!

So, how should the government help spin the money round the financial 
system? Invest in cleaner, safer, better staffed hospitals ...and safer 
special schools etc - or more war toys and bonuses for bank boys?

H.

> I do not subscribe to this 'not enough money in the kitty' baloney. Funds 
> can be made available. Even if all the schools in the UK were fenced it 
> would still only be the equivalent of a teaspoon out of the bucket we use to 
> pour money into the war budget or bailing banks out for lending policies 
> which in my view verge on criminal!

You might find it helpful to look at the relative sizes of the defence 
and education budgets.

http://budget2008.treasury.gov.uk/where_money_is_spent.htm

>
> I copied my complaint to the LEA, HSE and Sec. of State.
>
> LEA naturaly say they have complied. HSE investigated and say no case to
> answer. The LEa provided what purports to be the HSE investigation report. I
> think it was acrually written by an LEA H&S officer. It is riddled with
> mistakes and assumptions and is the reason for a complaint to the HSE
> complaints dept about their investigation. Sec of State says, in short, they
> follow HSE and LEA advice.


If the HSE have investigated and say the fence is okay, then you
haven't got a leg to stand on.

You sound like you have exhausted all avenues and so maybe the
suggestion of home schooling is the only answer to your worries.

smithy

H wrote:

> So, how should the government help spin the money round the financial
> system? Invest in cleaner, safer, better staffed hospitals ...and
> safer special schools etc - or more war toys and bonuses for bank
> boys?

That much is common ground, for sure.  Apparently we can afford to 'upgrade' 
Trident, but not to repair fences or provide decent nursing care to the 
sick.

Good luck in your campaign, sincerely.

"smithy"  wrote in message 
news:a6e82bd3-0fa4-4b6b-b93f-8541c9cf3779@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>>
>> I copied my complaint to the LEA, HSE and Sec. of State.
>>
>> LEA naturally say they have complied. HSE investigated and say no case to
>> answer. The LEA provided what purports to be the HSE investigation 
>> report. I
>> think it was actually written by an LEA H&S officer. It is riddled with
>> mistakes and assumptions and is the reason for a complaint to the HSE
>> complaints dept about their investigation. Sec of State says, in short, 
>> they
>> follow HSE and LEA advice.
>
>
> If the HSE have investigated and say the fence is okay, then you
> haven't got a leg to stand on.

No. It means I have to challenge how they came to that decision through a 
separate complaint process - something I think you're familiar with.

> You sound like you have exhausted all avenues and so maybe the
> suggestion of home schooling is the only answer to your worries.

No. Its just one of a number of possibilities.

> smithy

H.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 09:50:07 +0100, "a@b.invalid" <a@b.invalid> wrote:

>> I do not subscribe to this 'not enough money in the kitty' baloney. Funds 
>> can be made available. Even if all the schools in the UK were fenced it 
>> would still only be the equivalent of a teaspoon out of the bucket we use to 
>> pour money into the war budget or bailing banks out for lending policies 
>> which in my view verge on criminal!
>
>You might find it helpful to look at the relative sizes of the defence 
>and education budgets.
>
>http://budget2008.treasury.gov.uk/where_money_is_spent.htm

The biggest "slice" of pie goes to "Social Protection"  What's that?

-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

Mark wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 09:50:07 +0100, "a@b.invalid" <a@b.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> I do not subscribe to this 'not enough money in the kitty' baloney.
>>> Funds can be made available. Even if all the schools in the UK were
>>> fenced it would still only be the equivalent of a teaspoon out of
>>> the bucket we use to pour money into the war budget or bailing
>>> banks out for lending policies which in my view verge on criminal!
>>
>> You might find it helpful to look at the relative sizes of the
>> defence and education budgets.
>>
>> http://budget2008.treasury.gov.uk/where_money_is_spent.htm
>
> The biggest "slice" of pie goes to "Social Protection"  What's that?

Pensioners, doleys & disabled, child benefit etc...