National Body for Home Education Professionals: new threat to home ed in England


Well-known member
Is this the end of HE in the UK as we know it?

There are moves afoot to create an Association for Elective Home Education Professionals. We're talking the likes of LA officers, politicians, social workers etc., aided, no doubt, by the NSPCC in due course.

Their first meeting is in Feb. On the panel are some well known good guys and bad guys.

There's Graham Stuart. Arggh! I thought he was one of the good guys... or at least someone who has given the odd LA a clip 'round the ear holes. What's he doing associating with this lot, getting LA officers together and helping them get organised against us?

Barry Sheerman's on the panel. Of course! Makes perfect sense.

And Daniel Monk. His original paper from many years ago was pro-home ed but he gets his money from LAs now and his tune has changed. Changed drastically!

Here's a FoI request for copies of correspondence about this Association of HE officers. They haven't replied yet.

Reason for this group, from this post on SometimesItsPeaceful post:

"To raise awareness of the subject of home education in Parliament and to provide a platform for a full range of views about policy on home education."
They are ensuring a "full range of views" by barring the public from these meetings.

The above post and this one explain why this could be a lot more dangerous than it first appears.

Your thoughts?


There is a new threat to home education in England in the form of a 'National Body for Home Education Professionals' (the definition of 'professional' in this context is unclear) which is being launched (at taxpayers' expense) on 26 February.

Here is the line-up of suspects:

Graham Stuart MP
Lord Lucas
Nick Gibb (to be confirmed)
Barry Sheerman (to be confirmed)
Daniel Monk, Reader in Law, Birkbeck College, University College of London
Stephen Bishop, Department for Education, Lead in EHE policy
Members of the AEHEP committee, including Jenny Dodd (Chair), Dave Harvey (Vice Chair)

None of these individuals has experience or expertise in elective home education, and the majority of them are ideologically opposed to it. A couple seem determined to turn home ed bashing into a national pastime by fibbing about 'safeguarding' issues and producing / commissioning policy based 'evidence' which has in turn been demolished by this blogger and others. Furthermore, home educators were never consulted over the set-up, almost certainly because their reactions would have been almost universally negative.

The inherent wrongness of this car crash of an 'initiative', facilitated by Graham Stuart MP and supported various vested interests, has been discussed in various private forums and should clearly be 'laundered' in the wider public domain. The Twitterati certainly won't be silenced!

@offshorebella: @grahamstuart why for instance is Sheerman invited to speak when he notoriously talks about #homeed parents as if they are presumed guilty

‏@offshorebella: @grahamstuart and I cannot think of one #homeed parent who would want Jenny Dodd or Daniel Monk anywhere near such a body.

‏@Maire52: @offshorebella @grahamstuart It is almost a gallery of devils isn't it, confirming initial opinion :(

‏@thesurealist: @offshorebella @grahamstuart @Maire52 Why are those who hate families so involved in trying to monitor & control them? What's the purpose?
These professional suspects all have 'form' when it comes to knowing what's best for home educators and home educated children, some more than others, and we have been watching them for some time. It will no doubt all end badly, but the question must be: why is public money being squandered on what is effectively a lobby group for the introduction of a parent licensing scheme? Surely there are greater priorities, like protecting vulnerable children in the dubious 'care' of the state? This is an example of rentseeking at its most foul.

I'll sticky this thread so that people can add information on the body bods' 'previous'.


I'll merge the threads. Great minds think alike.:)
I should add there are justifiable concerns about how the information is being filtered and a distinct lack of trust in some of the 'messengers'.


Daniel Monk

I'll make a start with the infamous Daniel Monk, who is the author of a vitriolic attack on home education in the 'clothing' of an academic paper (I have a link somewhere).

He recently appeared on the panel of a Battle of Ideas session with Dr Stuart Waiton (sociologist from Abertay Uni in Dundee) and Dee Thomas (parent activist who exposed the data rape of school children in Perth & Kinross by the Dartington mob - picked up by Kenneth Roy of the Scottish Review). Both are heavily involved with the NO2NP campaign in Scotland and the video might give a few clues as to Daniel's Monk's anti-parent prejudices.

'Cinderella law’: criminalising parental authority?

Daniel Monk's research has previously included misquoting me from a newspaper article in which I had already been misquoted and about which I complained (he never checked).

He needs to read up on the ARCH archive which is the recognised gold standard when it comes to explaining and promoting children's rights in the context of the UNCRC and ECHR. He prefers to pick and mix the Articles to suit his adult orientated agenda (state ownership of children), and the rights of schooled children to receive a proper education / place of safety / freedom of expression / respect for privacy are of no interest to him.

To quote Katarina Tomasevski again (any excuse!), who unequivocally stated that schooling may violate a child's right to education:

"The objective of getting all school-aged children to school and keeping them there till they attain the minimum defined in compulsory education is routinely used in the sector of education, but this objective does not necessarily conform to human rights requirements.

In a country where all school-aged children are in school, free of charge, for the full duration of compulsory education, the right to education may be denied or violated. The core human rights standards for education include respect of freedom. The respect of parents' freedom to educate their children according to their vision of what education should be has been part of international human rights standards since their very emergence."
I don't see any of the hapless HEP dunderheids having anything like the intellectual capacity, or bona fides, of the late Katarina, the committed individuals who were involved with ARCH and the campaigners who are pursuing the JR in Scotland.

Deadly and dangerous prey in the form of parents protecting their young should never be messed with in this underhand and threatening way.


Barry Sheerman

As for Barry Sheerman, it's hard to know where to start.

@sb_campaign Why should this be a sensitive area we should know where every child is & the quality of their education! @tes
Wonder who 'we' might be? Might they include people like the ones on our not so little list?

The poor 'quality' of education provided by schools doesn't seem to exercise him in the slightest, as long as children turn up for their daily dose of dumbing down and data theft.


Barry Sheerman again

On 17/10/13 Barry Sheerman vilified home educators in this public tweet:

Home education is th next scandal which will eventually come to public attention. It is being used in ways that deeply concenrn @Ofstednews

He has long been mouthing off in ways that "deeply concern" home educators and placing home educated children in a state of fear and alarm. Meanwhile, local authorities 'lose' looked after children on a regular basis and the Westminster establishment has a history of exhibiting disturbing types of behaviour which should be subject to a great deal more public scrutiny.

Expenses scandals, paedophiles, cash for questions, cover ups, Rochdale, Rotherham, Islington, the list goes on...


Jenny Dodd

Moving on to Jenny Dodd, here's a resume prepared by a home educator. (The rest of that blog is very well worth reading - see this thread :))

You can buy a crown but it doesn’t make you king

Not being deterred by never having home educated a child herself or by the local HE community’s complete lack of faith in her Jenny Dodd appears to now consider herself so astoundingly knowledgeable that she is well placed to spearhead an Association of Elective Home Education Professionals.


Graham Stuart MP

Safe in the arms of Graham? Judge for yourself. I'll move on to the role of HEAS and other 'consultants' in a later post.

From Lisa's blog:

(Nov 2013)

Letter to Graham Stuart (Home Education APPG)

A key concern for me is the unelected nature of the APPG, its secretariat (HEAS) and the “secretariat support”. I can only find the APPG minutes on the secretariat support’s personal website, and from reading those minutes I have deduced that she is responsible for the preparation of delegate lists, invites, agendas, supporting/briefing papers and minutes. I tried to communicate directly with this individual, to be told that my questions would not be answered.

My questions regarding the structure of the APPG are below:

  • How and when was the secretariat and secretariat function proposed, agreed and clarified? By whom? What were the terms of reference?
  • To whom do I direct my request for a full client list of the secretariat/secretariat support, as per P11 of the HoC Guide to the Rules on All-Party Groups?
  • How do I arrange for all future delegate lists/agendas, supporting/briefing papers and minutes to be either made publicly available at the time of their production or sent directly to me and any other interested parties?
  • What is the formal position of the APPG with regard to proposals that are made and taken forward through the APPG without consultation with and representation of the home education community, especially when such proposals have the potential to negatively impact upon all home educating families?
  • Is there a procedure for challenging/appeal against the decision to incorporate a secretariat and/or “secretariat support” — on the grounds of, say, a lack of neutrality, conflict of interest, or unprofessionalism when dealing with key stakeholders?

(Dec 2013)

Responses from Graham Stuart MP regarding the HE APPG

It is alarming that belief is sufficient to drive forward a contentious proposal without consultation or the consent of the individuals who will be affected by such a move. Surely evidence is more compelling?

The fact that Graham recognises that an association would determine its own priorities but could do something useful is hugely problematic. This is exactly the point that those who are reticent about the proposal are making. There is often little cultural difference between the local authority officer and the local authority that employs them. Why contribute to an augmentation of power where it is so often accompanied by prejudice?
Over a year with no answers and deliberate obstruction on the part of all those involved with this publicly funded travesty. I smell cash for data rentseeking opportunities.
Other LA bods on the list

Have personal experience of Dave Harvey and I wouldnt class him as one of the bad guys.

He is responsible for Elective Home Education - along with lots of other stuff at Hants - like most employees he is multi-tasking due to cost cutting exercises

He is aware of the law - tells his staff to stick to it - if they dont it is not on his say so - if you complain then at least there is some action on his part

Have no idea how this will all pan out but at least one of them has read the EHE Guidelines and is familiar with it and does not see Home Education per se as Welfare concerns as do other authorities


A few members from here and from AHEd, allegedly, which means it must be OK. :heh:

From FB and Twitter:

Just for info for anyone who missed the clues! A few AHEd and HEF members decided to affirm that #homeed parents and their children are the only true #EHE experts and signed up to a simple online declaration of #freedomineducation on behalf of their own families. 400+ other experts evidently felt similarly inclined #EveryVoiceMatters
Declaration posted here.


Well-known member
Do you know if they're planning their own website / blog? Or is it the case that it's going to be open only to Farcebook fans?

While I know that there are large HE groups on that awful site, I do also know that many HE families are smarter than most when it comes to privacy and they don't have FB accounts.
My reading of it is that common sense and reasonableness has come out slightly ahead at this stage. It will be interesting if everyone whose LA attended could ask their attendee for their impressions of it all to see which way it's turning.


Another waste of taxpayers money by parasitic public servants and fifth columnists, and another distraction from the bigger picture.

Presumably the link posted was to the usual newspeak. I didn't follow it as Candy Crush Saga has more value than the sort of drivel churned out by self appointed 'experts' who would happily sell their own granny if the price was right.

I wonder what was on the free lunch menu, apart from stitching up home educators in England? This sort of crap is paid for by public funds, but which budget did it come from?

Human husbandry sums it up, as Neil points out.

Whether you look on them as predators or farmers, and the latter is surely what they primarily are, the outcome is the same: we are their food supply.

Looking after our 'wellbeing' is farming, isn't it? Good animal husbandry. The oxymoronic 'Professional association of home education officers' is merely another 'farm implement'.