Chris Packham-led campaign urges prime minister to rethink SEND reforms

A group of parents, children and experts led by broadcaster Chris Packham has urged Prime Minister Andy Burnham to rethink core elements of England’s reforms to special educational needs and disabilities provision.

In a letter published by the Guardian, 36 signatories said the proposals could reduce children’s and young people’s legal rights to enforceable education, health and care plans (EHCPs), parental choice of school and independent appeals.

The signatories include actor Sally Phillips, clinical psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen and Guardian columnist John Harris.

Proposed replacement for EHCPs

The overhaul, announced in February by former prime minister Keir Starmer and then education secretary Bridget Phillipson, would replace legally enforceable EHCPs with individual support plans. These would be agreed by parents and schools but would not have an independent legal appeal route.

Schools, rather than local authorities, would administer the plans. Parents unhappy with a decision would be expected to appeal to the school instead of an independent tribunal.

Cost pressures and campaign demands

The government says the reform is intended to curb rapidly rising costs, which have left councils in England facing a projected £6bn shortfall in two years. Schools would also receive more resources to support children with SEND.

Campaigners want the existing EHCP threshold retained, parents to keep the right to appeal to a tribunal, and the proposed assessment system for individual support plans scrapped. They also warn that parents may submit more EHCP applications before the new system takes effect.

Ministers are consulting on the measures and are expected to recommend some changes. People close to the process say Burnham and new education secretary Lucy Powell are more likely to make limited changes to strengthen legal protections than adopt the campaigners’ call for a wholesale rewrite.

The Department for Education said schools’ legal duties to identify and support children’s needs were being strengthened and that parents would retain a route to challenge decisions about their child’s support.