I wish to complain about the current consultation on Home Education.
there are a number of areas that are the basis of my complaint

1. It does not comply with the code of practice for consultations as
it is not running for at least 12 weeks.

“All consultation documents should conform to the seven criteria from
the Code of Practice on Consultation. These are listed opposite. No
Department is exempt and ministers are obliged to explain any
departure from the code.

Consult widely throughout the process, allowing a minimum of 12 weeks
for written consultation at least once during the development of the
policy”

2.The consultation is only open to people who respond online, i.e. no
written representations are permitted, again, this is in breech of the
code of practice.

3. The consultation itself is also discriminatory against the home ed
community. Abuse takes place in all walks of life and to single out
home educators as being responsible for it is offensive and
discriminatory.

4. The wording of Q6 is misleading:

“Some people have expressed concern that home education could be used
as a cover for child abuse, forced marriage, domestic servitude or
other forms of child neglect. What do you think Government should do
to ensure this does not happen?”

In the first sentence it says “some people have expressed concern….”
and then goes onto say, “What should the government do to ensure this
does not happen” The second sentence assumes that the first is true
when it is only an assumption.

I would like to see the evidence behind this. it appears that the
NSPCC itself holds no evidence for this. I find, in the absence of any
references given, this to be a defamatory statement [In law,
defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is
the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly
stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual,
business, product, group, government or nation a negative image] and
feel that this should be immediately retracted.

I would like to point out that like other children, those home
educated access healthcare providers, community facilities and have
families, neighbours and friends, all of whom would be able to access
the standard child protection facilities. In all the high profile
child protection stories in the newspapers, there have been multiple
flags from a variety of professionals including doctors and social
services already involved. It does not appear that the presence [or
absence in the case of some withdrawn] of schooling has been a
deciding or flagging factor in raising the alarm of abuse.

I would also like to state that these repeated consultations are a
form of government intimidation and bullying. There appears to be
wilful and persistent spreading of rumours and slander against the
home education population without corroborative evidence, suggesting
that the parents within that group abuse their children or are not
educating their children or looking towards their wider welfare. there
is a clear imbalance of power towards the government, leaving home
educators feeling defenceless and bullied.

I will be including this in a complaint to the Select Committee for
Children Schools and Families [csfcom@...] and also to my MP

I would appreciate your comments on this consultation. I believe it
should be withdrawn as it does not comply with the code of practice
and it is discriminatory. I would like an apology given to the home education community for misrepresenting them in this way.