PILS & EQUALTITY COMMISSION SEMINAR: CHALLENGING THE CUTS 2.3.12

Rachel Hogan BL. SENDIST Representative, Children’s Law Centre

Introduction to CLC

  • Legal issues re children under 18 years
  • Freephone CHALKY advice line
  • Legal team, Policy, Training and Youth@CLC

Examples of recent experience re cuts and service related cases

  • JR30 – CIN and their families – duty to assess and provide services (WHSCT)
  • JR66 – CIN and duty to accommodate (NHSCT)
  • JR62 – Judgment awaited re provision of LTSS for child with SEN(SEELB)
  • JR64 - judgment awaited re care package for severely disabled child (WHSCT)
  • Knockmore PS – resource led decision making in an equality vacuum

In one week in November 2011 – 3 JRs listed.

Concern: to access public service entitlements children having to take legal action where previously we may have been able to settle without going to court

How the cases were identified and selected

  • Calls to advice line – CHALKY STATS year to 31st January 2012
  • Referrals from NGOs, previous clients, professionals
  • Long standing issues – same case time after time – ever more stark factual scenarios emerging re cuts and authorities unable to settle due to funding implications
  • CASEWORK CRITERIA
  • STRATEGIC AREAS

Problems/Obstacles

  • Settlement pre-hearing e.g. dyslexia; classroom assistance, allied health services
  • Cuts fatigue – decision makers unable to engage to find creative solutions
  • Access to basic information from public authorities – failures to engage/respond
  • Lack of cooperation between departments e.g. Health/Education; Trusts/NIHE

Tips

  • Patience/strategy – identify a strong case
  • Information
  • gather and test basic factual information on individual case
  • build up evidence and statistics about wider impacts
  • Collaborate with other NGOs for specialised information
  • Paper trail – FOIs and letters seeking information
  • Combine several tactics e.g. legal, policy, lobbying, campaigning, media, human interest and community support
  • Knee jerk cost cutting decisions based on resources alone will be procedurally flawed in terms of equality – do the research and find the flaws (e.g. lack of consultation, factual inaccuracies at the base of the decision
  • Thinking time, strategy, inspiration and a little bit of luck!

Collaboration with NGOs and Legal Profession

  • We have built good working relationships with other NGOs e.g. affidavit evidence
  • Regular communication of ideas and information
  • Alliances – strength in numbers e.g. CDSA
  • We instruct Counsel directly and sometimes refer cases out to private Solicitors
  • Focus is different in private practice than in NGOs
  • Lawyers experts in the legal framework surrounding cuts cases
  • NGOs experts on the practical adverse equality impacts on vulnerable groups
  • A strong combination when used effectively – more collaboration desirable

JR66 SUMMARY (10/2/12)

Homeless 16 year old child – refused suitable emergency accommodation

Long-standing issue re CLC Advice Line

Entitled to accommodation as a “child in need” under Art 21 C(NI)O 1995

Trust conceded at leave hearing that

  • Article 21 was breached and
  • now an eligible child under Article 34A

Judgement sets out 7 step legal test to determine Article 21 entitlement (Southwark HL)

Eligible child:

  • Personal Advisor
  • assessment to determine ongoing support needs
  • pathway plan with regular review

Regional Good Practice Guidance re accommodating 16-21 year olds;

  • Published by NIHE and Trusts
  • Constructive engagement with CLC to review the guidance

KNOCKMORE PRIMARY SCHOOL - SUMMARY

Proposed closure of PS and relocation of 4 SLT and 3 Social Communication Units

Misapplied own policy.

Sustainable Schools:

Urban 140

Rural 105

Knockmore 143

Subtracted children in the unit from school numbers to produce a figure of 81 pupils.

A financial decision (£££) made in an equality vacuum (human cost, community cost, loss of a fine model of inclusion)

No equality screening in advance of policy; lack of proper consultation

Rationale founded on segregation rather than inclusion

In reality great degree of integration with children and staff moving between the school/units

A model of good practice in terms of inclusion; operating within budget; good ETI inspection report.

CLC approach

Multidisciplinary strategic approach within CLC – policy and legal team drafted a detailed submission to SEELB outlining potential breaches of equality laws and human rights instruments

Collaboration with all other interested parties – CLC played a part in a big effort along with others

Combination of strategies – policy work, campaigning, lobbying, media, community support

1