03/05/2026
LAs misunderstanding lawful remits
If implemented, the CWS Act would markedly increase powers and remits of council staff, without any external oversight, accountability, appeals, complaints, mediation, advocacy or tribunal services.
Safe?
When councils so often already overstep or misunderstand lawful remits.
Really?
Do they really do that already?
More evidence to appear here soon,
But just for one example – a “friendly-appearing” template introductory letter to new home educators from one LA in Wales, states:
“The Local Authority have now received the de registration form and your letter requesting to home educate your child. Your child has now been added to the Local Authority’s home education records.
“I am not sure how much information has been shared with you about home education. The local authority has two roles: to monitor home education and offer support where needed”.
With the letter then going on to set into plan arrangements for a meeting with parents and child.
So – what’s the problem with that?
(1) Deregistration is not a “request” – it is an instruction with immediate effect.
So what, you may think.
But it indicates a starting point in demonstrating misunderstanding of who is responsible for education.
It is parents, not councils, that are responsible for a child’s education – and it may surprise you to realise that’s the same whether the child attends school or not.
That’s why parents cannot sue the council for a school failing to provide a suitable education, - as legally it was the parents choice to place them there.
Do councils, and the government, really want to assume responsibility for ensuring every child receives a suitable education – do they really want to make themselves legally and financially liable for the failings in the school system, open to be sued for every time a school does not deliver suitable education for each and every child?
(2) “the LA has two roles: to monitor home education”.
False information.
There is presently no lawful remit to monitor home education.
If further clarification of this were needed:
The English EHE guidelines, based on exactly the same primary legislation that applies to Wales makes this quite clear- “your local authority has no lawful powers or duty to monitor the provision of education at home”.
(The rather poorly drafted Welsh EHE guidance omits to mention this).
However, the Welsh CME guidance clearly confirms there is no lawful basis or remit for monitoring of home education.
Maybe you think that councils “should” monitor home educating families.
That is a separate conversation.
The whole point here is that councils do not have this power or remit and yet are regularly acting as if they do.
Misuse of existing powers.
Regularly overstepping and misusing existing powers, alongside providing false information to families and society, with no accountability or redress for doing so.
So we have here just one example clear evidence of council staff not understanding their own role and remit, and conveying false information to families.
Clear overstepping.
Some would call this coercive control.
And – sadly a spoiler alert – this is most definitely not the only council in Wales to do or state so – more information will follow in due course.
Do they not know they are overstepping and acting without lawful remit?
One would expect that council staff should have a basic understanding of their duties and legislation. Hasn’t anyone told them?
Well, see this article for examples of how just one home education group (Home Ed Cymru) have tried over the years to engage with councils and address such misunderstandings and misinformation.
https://wellbeingineducationwales.co.uk/2026/04/30/examples-of-communications-from-home-ed-cymru-with-wg-and-local-councils/
But there is no duty on councils to correct such misconduct or errors, and therefore wrong, and some would believe coercive practice, continues.
(3) “offer support”.
Nice idea, one might think.
It isn’t actually a legal duty btw, so that’s not exactly accurate info either.
But what is meant by support?
Support, by definition, should be voluntary and without strings attached.
And just how can those who have never home educated be a source of information and support to those who home educate?
Especially when they’ve already demonstrated such fundamental lack of understanding?
In some circles, there is a saying, that “support” is a euphemism for attempts at “control”.
(4) arranging meetings –
But without making it clear that these are a purely voluntary option, that there will be no negative repercussions of declining this offer, of communicating via other means. Not even suggesting the option of other means of communication.
Some would feel that this is coercive.
Is that deliberately so?
Again, home education groups have attempted for years to convey the importance of communications being open, transparent, accurate, and reflective of the whole situation.
To no effect it would seem.
A Freedom of Information request to a different Welsh Council interestingly revealed the admission they had been deliberately omitting info from the correspondences with home educating families. It would appear this was in an attempt to change their behaviour and “make them” have meetings they may not have consented to otherwise. More information on this to follow subsequently.
Again – maybe you think that families “should” have to have meetings.
That, again, is a separate conversation.
What we’re addressing here is the concept that there has to be accountability and redress for overstepping of present remits and/or use of misinformation under existing powers before we can even have conversations about whether those powers or remits need to be increased or not.
After all, what would the situation be if existing powers were used correctly and respectfully?
And IF the conclusion is that, for whatever reason, ordinary families need to be overseen and monitored,
Then surely there needs to be oversight and monitoring of those who do the oversight and monitoring?
Will prospective Senedd Members hear this need?
