|
Post by jo70mo on Oct 25, 2011 12:37:37 GMT 1
Ok I need input into an argument as to why the missing docs are integral to the draft policy/consultation. After writing to Bob Stott and the chief exec, the chief exec has responded with this comment. "The lead for EHE has assured me that there are no internal EHE documents that would be considered integral to the consultation"
|
|
fionan
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by fionan on Oct 25, 2011 19:49:57 GMT 1
People can put in consultation responses based on the actual words of the draft policy but I guess they would need to make it clear in the consultation response where there is something they haven't actually seen or they don't know exactly what something is going to be like, eg the wording on a particular form.
Because you're not just writing a consultation response for the employees who will read it at Lancs Council, you're writing it for a wider audience of Councillors, MPs, home educators elsewhere etc? And the wider audience needs it spelled out, in case the Council were ever to try and claim that you had approved something which you've explicitly said you haven't seen. Your hands are clean, if that makes sense?
|
|
fran
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by fran on Oct 26, 2011 20:59:48 GMT 1
I'm just whinging now but this is basically what they are already saying. They are saying that they have re-written this document as per our request but they haven't. We asked that they re-write the document in consultation with us. No matter who we try to contact about it, they keep telling us that the Department are doing what we wanted but they aren't and we don't seem to be able to get that across to anybody.
|
|
|
Post by archelaus on Oct 29, 2011 15:09:03 GMT 1
In one message the LA has said : 'With regard to paperwork it is our intention to amend relevant documentation to reflect any changes that may arise from the outcomes of consultation' Yet in another they've said: 'The lead for EHE has assured me that there are no internal EHE documents that would be considered integral to the consultation.' They need to make up their minds! Of all the docs that are missing the EHE1A is the most important one and we have a good idea of what is in it, what shouldn't be in it and what it should look like. Why don't people, as part of their responses to the LA, state that the current EHE1A is not acceptable, raises data protection questions as it asks for far more information than necessary and should be replaced by a much simpler document, e.g. Gloucestershire's Parent Plan: www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/utilities/action/act_download.cfm?mediaid=31734Then the LA will know what people's views are as I doubt they've any plans to consult on any of the additional documents despite what the task group said.
|
|
fionan
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by fionan on Oct 29, 2011 16:47:54 GMT 1
Hi Archelaus, I agree with this. In fact I would go further and say something in a consultation response on the lines of
"In the Procedures section of the draft policy, the Council states that schools will be asked to complete a form giving information about any child who is being withdrawn from school for home education. The Council has been unwilling to disclose the contents of this form for scrutiny. Therefore all references to the form should be omitted from the Council's policy. The Pupil Registration Regulations 2006 state only that the school should notify the local authority that a child has been removed from the roll for home education.
Secondly, in the Procedures section of the draft policy, the Council makes reference to form EHE1A. The Council has been unwilling to disclose the contents of this form for scrutiny. Therefore all references to this form should be omitted from the Council's policy.
Should the Council wish to present a draft EHE1A to the home education community for scrutiny at a later date, we recommend that xxx from Gloucestershire might be considered as the basis for such a form."
|
|
|
Post by jo70mo on Oct 29, 2011 16:59:52 GMT 1
the arrogant and patronising attitude is staggering. they are consulting us: sections of the community ask to see documents that are referenced in the draft policy and are told we don't believe you need to see them. Well the consultation is about asking our opinion and mine at least is that I need to see those documents in order to make informed comment on the procedural part of the consultation. But no - they believe they know better than me what I do and don't need in order to meaningfully comment. its rubbish
|
|
|
Post by jo70mo on Oct 29, 2011 17:01:10 GMT 1
Thats probably not too helpful for people deciding what to write - sorry rant over :-)
|
|
|
Post by tricia on Nov 24, 2011 10:43:26 GMT 1
I'm now glad the LA refused to supply the docs as the FoI request has brought to light others that we didn't know existed and should never have been written. The current versions of the documents referred to by the draft protocols can be found in: www.Lancashire-HE.org.uk/docs/consultThe LA has said they will be reviewed after the protocols doc is finished. Yesterday, they agreed to consult with us when the docs are being rewritten which is a step in the right direction.
|
|
fionan
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by fionan on Nov 24, 2011 10:50:38 GMT 1
Sounds like progress if the Council has agreed in public to consult with you when the docs are being rewritten. Are there going to be minutes agreed for the meeting?
|
|
|
Post by tricia on Nov 24, 2011 11:32:10 GMT 1
Yes, minutes will be sent out for us to check asap. Once agreed we'll publish them on the website.
Mike was put on the spot about consulting on the docs but I'm sure he understands why it was necessary. It's a pity they don't have plans to get comments on the revised protocols before they get signed off.
|
|