division_name: Opposition Day &#8212; [4th Allotted Day] &#8212; Special Educational Needs
motion: <p class="" pid="b.106.3/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move,</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b.106.3/2" pwmotiontext="yes">That this House notes the conclusions reached by Baroness Warnock in 2005 that inclusion has failed many children; further notes the recommendation of the Education and Skills Committee that a major review be undertaken of Special Educational Needs (SEN) provision; further notes the decline in the number of special schools since 1997; further notes that there are currently no plans for a review of the closure of special schools before 2009; further notes that SEN pupils who are not in special schools who do not have statements account for almost half of all permanent exclusions; further notes the non-statutory nature of the new measures to encourage those local authorities planning to close a special school to demonstrate that alternate provision would be better; believes that the inclusion policy of the Government's Removing Barriers to Achievement document encourages local authorities to shut special schools; shares Baroness Warnock's opinion that inclusion is failing many children; further believes that resources in many mainstream schools are not adequate to deal with the SEN children in their care; considers that the initial and in-service training of teachers of SEN pupils should be strengthened; and therefore calls on the Government to follow the recommendation of the Education and Skills Committee to conduct a fundamental review of SEN provision, including the statutory provisions for statementing and meeting need, and to put a moratorium on the closure of special schools until that review has taken place.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="b.114.2/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move, To leave out from "House" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof:</p>
  
  <p class="indent" pid="b.114.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes">"notes the conclusions reached by Baroness Warnock in 2005 but does not agree that inclusion has failed many children; does not agree with the view of the Education and Skills Committee that a fundamental review is needed of special educational needs provision or of the system of assessments and statements; welcomes the fact that in 2004 the Government put in place a long-term strategy for improving outcomes for children with special educational needs and disabled children that is already having an impact on their achievement; acknowledges the record levels of spending by local authorities on special educational needs of some &#163;4.5 billion in 2006-07 that are underpinning the strategy; welcomes the measures announced in the Government's response to the Education and Skills Committee on providing better training for staff working with children with special educational needs including a national programme of continuing professional development, nationally accredited training for Special Educational Needs Coordinators in schools and measures to increase access to specialist teachers; further welcomes the announcement of an additional 15 special schools with specialist status to share expertise and raise standards and the increase in specialist and unit provision for children within, or attached to, mainstream schools; commends the Government's plans for ensuring that local authority proposals for changing special educational provision must show how they will improve provision for children with special educational needs; and considers that a moratorium on closing special schools would prevent locally elected authorities from improving their provision for children with special educational needs."</p>
  
  <p pid="b.146.2/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> Question put, </i>That the original words stand part of the Question:&#8212;</p>
  
  <p pid="b.146.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes"><i> The House divided:</i> Ayes 221, Noes 296.</p>