The PSHE Bill

Young volunteer Pippa blogs about last week's PSHE Bill

Young members of Brook Blackburn's LGBT youth group
show their support for the #PSHEBill

Last Wednesday (15 July), Green Party MP Caroline Lucas successfully championed the ‘Personal Social Health and Economic Education (Statutory Requirement) Bill’ in the House of Commons [this Storify has the highlights from the speeches]. Her ‘PSHE Bill’ aims to make personal, social, health and economic education compulsory in schools across the UK. The PSHE Bill was passed with 183 MPs voting in favour and only 44 voting against.

You might have heard of this bill before: it was first introduced in the House of Commons in July 2014 but didn’t make it to a second reading before the election period began.

We’re overjoyed that the PSHE Bill has been reintroduced with such a large majority and with support from all sides of the political spectrum!

Unfortunately, later last week, the Department for Education dismissed the House of Commons Education Committee’s recommendation that PSHE should be a statutory requirement, which makes the passage of the PSHE Bill all the more important.

Next steps for the PSHE Bill

1.     

Young people in their second week of the NCS programme in
Cornwall get behind the #PSHEBill!

  The PSHE Bill will now progress to a second reading in the House of Commons. This is an opportunity for MPs to debate the general principles of the bill before voting on it a second time.

2.       If a majority of MPs vote in favour again, the bill will progress to the Committee Stage, where it will be considered in more detail by a committee of MPs who may propose some amendments.

3.       The PSHE Bill (as amended) will then be put forward to the House of Commons again for consideration (the Report stage). All MPs may speak and propose amendments at this stage.

4.       A third reading will then take place in the House of Commons. At this point, no more amendments can be made by the Commons. MPs will quickly debate the bill as it currently stands, before voting a third time.

5.       If all goes well and MPs vote in favour a third time, the PSHE Bill will progress to the House of Lords, which follows the same procedure of first reading, second reading, committee stage, report stage and third reading. If the House of Lords make any amendments to the Bill during this process before voting in favour, the PSHE Bill will be sent back to the House of Commons for consideration.

6.       If the House of Lords agree to the Bill without making any amendments, or once their amendments are agreed by the House of Commons, the Bill will gain royal assent and become law (yay!).

It’s a long process with quite a few hurdles, but we’ll be keeping our fingers crossed every step of the way.

All schoolchildren deserve to learn about safe sex, consent and healthy relationships!

Thanks, Pippa - we could not agree more! 

On young people, grit and maturity

This blog is inspired by a brilliant feature on R4 last night. Much of it is similar ground to that covered in recent weeks, so feel free to jump to the last six paragraphs if you just want to read about the feature that started from a position of trusting and liking young people.

I was really pleased when Nick Hurd, Minister for Civil Society got the cross government 'youth brief' because you don't have to spend much time with Mr Hurd to know he is an advocate, supporter and ally of young people. I was therefore interested in the response he received from colleagues, friends and commentators when he said young people needed more grit. His comments came on the back of business saying (yet again) that young people need more soft skills to get on in the work place. Given we all need these skills for everyday living I think these skills are anything but soft but that is a different issue.

I was really pleased to hear Nick, a Minister at the heart of this government, focus on 'grit'. As a long time campaigner for PSHE education in schools and health and well being in youth, community, care and secure settings I heard something different than some who accused him of underestimating young people. Maybe I heard (hear) only what I wanted to hear - a Minister saying schools should do more PSHE.  Anyhow I hope we have just found another advocate for PSHE and I shall be writing to him to encourage him to keep up the advocacy on this and other related issues of young people's development. I shall also try to get a a word in on this issue in at my next meeting with him about the Compact.

Those who did take from his comments that young people do not have grit are absolutely right to challenge that. Of course they do, in spades. Day in day out at Brook we see young people with grit, determination and emotional intelligence in bucket loads often way beyond their years. I had the privilege of being part of a small round table with young people recently about sex and sexuality in which they talked openly, honestly, with candour and eloquence that is light years away from those young people we see portrayed in the media with frightening frequency.

Their message - that we continue to push sexuality and sexual issues under the carpet and often leave them ill prepared to navigate their way through puberty, adolescence, early sexual relationships and adulthood - is a matter of shame for successive governments. And that is true now more than ever as we learn more about online bullying, sexual exploitation, violence and abuse. Our responses to all these issues must be determined, coherent and focused on removing structural inequalities and developing common humanity and pro social behaviours. It is all too easy to focus on technological solutions (that are part of the answer), but absolutely not all of it.

The best answer as - you would expect me to say - lies in education that in turn promotes culture change - building a culture where it is seen as wrong to hurt and bully people that are different for whatever reason, and as important a culture in which it is absolutely right to ask for help. I was struck by an article in the Guardian today where a young woman said too often adults don't help you in real life when it (bullying) is happening face to face let alone online. That was true when I was at school, and that must change.

I often digest news report and wonder how different things really are for young people now from when you or I were young. It is easy to talk about the things that have changed - and there are many of them - the internet for one. When I worked at the National Children's Bureau Professor Rachel Thomson presented a fascinating story of three generations of women in one family. One thing stuck out in the discussions afterwards - much had changed, but they had common feelings in different situations, and second that we will lose our way in work with young people if we forget what it felt like to be young ourselves.

I think I had a pretty typical mostly happy childhood. Adolescence may have been a bit hairy for others watching at times, particularly my parents, as I became independent and searched high and low for an identity I was happy to own. I delighted in pushing the boundaries - possibly as far as they would go in all directions at times - so when I hear people talk about the depravity of young people's summer holidays and long nights clubbing I quietly smile to myself and remember how much fun it was. Mostly. And I wonder whether or how much things have really changed, or whether we one, two, three of four decades on have just forgotten what it was like to be young, and are worried because it isn't exactly the same and so we can't quite understand it.

So I almost jumped out of my chair with delight last night when the tables were reversed in a feature on R4 last night. The report started with vox pops from Malia in Crete. The same place I went on holiday when I completed my A levels. The report was peppered with disgust at the behaviour of the young but when the young people talked it sounded pretty much like the early 90s to me.

A young woman from UK Youth Parliament and a journalist in her 40s, were presented with the evidence that young people are drinking less, doing less drugs and getting pregnant less than 20 years ago. It was so refreshing to hear a conversation between generations that started from a position of respecting young people, and thinking of them as talented, moral agents; as young people who should be having fun, pushing boundaries and learning who they are.

With this starting point the adult guest was free to describe her heady days of being young, and express her concern that maybe, just maybe some young people have to grow up too fast, deal with too much, and so are missing out on being young. The younger guest was able to say sometimes things are really tough, we don't always want to party, and sometimes you don't give us credit for our maturity.

It was the type of conversation about young people I want to see and hear more of. One that reflects the reality of young lives, and the reality of those young lives lived by people now slightly older, creating bridges between generations, rather than great big lakes. Well done Radio 4. A role model for other media outlets I hope.

Tackling bullying needs deep rooted culture change

The last few weeks we have seen rotten and thoroughly unacceptable online behaviour with sadly tragic consequences.

Our timelines have been filled with untold horrors including evidence of rape threats, death and bomb threats, sexual violence and extreme online bullying. My thoughts of course go out to the individuals and families who are dealing with threats of violence, with violence and with deaths of loved ones.

Against that backdrop there is, it seems, a welcome and important change afoot based on a reawakened realisation that misogyny and bullying is alive, well and kicking, and a collective determination to do something about it. This time the media focus is on behaviours displayed online. Important though it is to find cyber-solutions, let us remember bad behaviour is not new to our era. There are many examples of 'off line trolling' such as the protesters at the funeral of 21 year old man Matthew Shepard who was brutally murdered. Despicably anti gay protesters turned up with banners showing 'Matt in Hell and No Fags in Heaven'.

Technological solutions of course play an important part. Like 'porn filters' technology cannot provide the whole answer. I agree wholeheartedly with Mr Cameron, sites must step up to the plate and do all they reasonably can to ensure online bullying does not happen, and where it does they must tackle it. I also agree that parents and children must have much more discussion about online activity, and to be able to seek help and support when they need to.

There is of course an insidious problem with online behaviour – many parents and professionals feel flummoxed about what to do to tackle online behaviours. We mustn't. Just like our off line lives we can and must nurture the courage, confidence and skills to shut down, disable accounts and walk away.

Of course people are looking for the tough response. Calling for a site to shut down is a tough response. Deep down however, do we believe it will fully achieve the change we need to see? If somebody I loved was hurt online I would want to shut down the site too. But that doesn't make it a cure-all response that will create the right results. Imagine if we shut down every school, college, university and workplace where serious bullying takes place. However, like schools and other institutions, the online sites must respond proactively to tackle bullying.

So the task is much more fundamental and much bigger than closing down a site now and another next month – it is one that challenges the way we live and changes our cultural and social norms. It requires a willingness and desire to live side by side with people the same and different from us and sustained coherent public policy which supports that goal. It requires cultural and societal change from the very top which determines that bullying, violence and prejudice in all its forms including misogyny and homophobia is completely unacceptable on or off line. Always and without argument these cannot be tolerated whether in our parliamentary chambers, our primary school playgrounds or our social networking sites.

And that requires considerable changes to what we teach children and young people – not just about online safety and cyber bullying – but about structural inequalities and the nature and abuse of power, about prejudice and bullying, respect and consent. It also requires us all to learn to manage conflict, its importance for fulfilling lives and how to respond and manage it well and where to go for help and support.

That education is a job for all. It must be at home, at school and in the community – in our churches, our youth clubs and voluntary youth provision. That is why again I would have liked Mr Cameron to focus on the role of education too. Wouldn't it have been fantastic if he had said today: "Until now we have got it wrong on PSHE education. It’s time for change and time to make sure every child in every school gets excellent Personal, Social, Health and Economic education that prepares them to manage their lives on and off line both now and in the future. I want to make sure every child and young person receives PSHE education that has equality at its heart, ensures children and young people know bullying and prejudice is always wrong, and that help is always available however big or little an issue seems."

In the end it comes down to this – our best tool for change is positive education that creates new norms. Yes we must demand that social networking sites do all they can and be accountable for doing all they can. We must expect investment in technological solutions so they do all they can. But violence and bullying is done by people and we must recognise technological solutions will not be able to compensate for the attitudes that leads to bullying behaviour. 

We cannot continue to only react when things go wrong and lives are lost – we must make active steps to prevent this from happening. And we must not continue to condemn young people for unacceptable behaviour and bullying without investing the time, energy and money to help young people lead the way in creating positive social norms and pro-social behaviours.

There is now a wasted opportunity – the new National Curriculum consultation closes today, as it currently stands it will not ensure all children and young people get good quality PSHE education which will help them develop the skills, personal qualities and behaviours to manage their on and off line lives. 

Against this backdrop of extreme concern we must also remember that overall the Internet is a positive force for good. Everyday it provides vital advice, information and support for all children and young people – including those who are being bullied such as that provided by www.brook.org.uk, www.thesite.org and Beat Bullying's cyber mentors http://www.beatbullying.org/. A group of young people I talked to earlier this week were also keen to remind me that most young people are 'fairly nice' and do not bully and hurt others. Even in hard and emotional times we must remember this, while working together to change the behaviour of those who engage in bullying behaviour, and giving help and ensure the best support to those who are targeted.

Let’s banish Section 28 forever

A week or so ago I tweeted about the dreadful Section 28. I fully understand why Section 28 is being talked about so much in the wake of Lady Thatcher's death and like most sensible people I want it to RIP. This year, even before Thatcher’s' death, the Equal Marriage legislation had brought Section 28 back into the public conscience – with some absurd parliamentarians remarkably wanting a new version for the 21st Century. Unthinkable and despicable.

Section 28 was homophobic, evil, pernicious and unworkable poor legislation – it was unworkable because it never applied to schools who were and continue to be responsible for sex education. But it had an enormous impact nonetheless. And those who introduced, supported and tried to uphold it should be ashamed. I was 13 in 1987, and I was growing up gay in North Cornwall. Like many others in my school I could have done with someone saying 'being gay is alright, you're not the only one, you are safe here and you can lead a happy, fulfilling life.'

The silence in the classroom and the relentless taunting and bullying of those perceived to be gay in the playground (including one or two teachers perceived to be gay) taught me quite the opposite. That said, I don't think Section 28 made any substantive difference to our sex education. It consisted of a video about 'intercourse' that is probably the source of some of my squeamishness now. I can only remember one sentence of any use – 'don't worry boys you can't come when you are going and you can't go when you are coming.' Not one of us – gay, straight or otherwise – could have left our sex ed armed with the useful information required ready to enjoy the trials and tribulations of our young desires reassured and happy.

But that appalling, but at least equitable, standard of sex education doesn't make me any less angry that politicians, the media and many people in society thought Section 28 was acceptable – not least in the face of AIDS which was just taking its ugly, devastating foothold within the gay community. (It would be too easy here to overlook the single good thing that did come out of Section 28 – Stonewall who have succeeded in positively influencing so much legislation, policy and practise in all areas of gay life – I am grateful to the brave individuals who set up the group, and the continuing work they do now in the UK and overseas).

Over the last fifteen years or so the UK has made terrific progress in tackling homophobia in schools and wider society. First we recognised the problem existed and started to face up to it. Then we equalised the age of consent and repealed Section 28. At the same time government took decisive action to address bullying of all sorts which eventually came to explicitly include homophobic bullying.

But sex and relationships education remains patchy, and sexuality is still too often invisible within schools. For some, Section 28 still creates confusion and concern. In the worst of cases Section 28 still legitimises homophobia and allows school leaders and teachers to be silent about sexuality and perpetuate their own unwelcome prejudice. In reality the number of teachers and school leaders who genuinely think Section 28 applies to schools is reducing rapidly. It was repealed a long time ago and many newer teachers haven't even heard of it.

But some still have and that’s the tricky problem. Like all myths and misinformation you do sometimes have to talk about them openly to correct them: and then by talking about them you help keep the myth and its possible impact alive. As an aside it is interesting that I cannot remember in recent times hearing anyone say the age of consent used to be unequal. Rarely do I see much information about the age of consent as it was prior to 2000 (when it was finally equalised at 16 in Great Britain).

Up until a few years ago I trained teachers regularly. When talking about sex education and the law I used to include reference to Section 28 to be clear it was ok to talk about homosexuality. Ironically many newer teachers would hear about Section 28 for the first time on that course and it would create fear. Despite all my words of reassurance that it didn't and had never applied to schools, and that it was no longer statute anyway I know from feedback that it frightened some.

So I decided to stop talking about Section 28 unless specifically asked what it was and I stopped referring to it in any guidance I was writing. Instead I made sure I only included the positive and helpful statements that affirmed the importance of teaching about sexuality – such as the very helpful and positive equal opportunities statement at the beginning of the national curriculum, and the sections of the SRE guidance which are clear prejudice is unacceptable and gay children must be supported. That seemed to work and instil confidence rather than fear.

So Section 28 is officially dead and has been for over ten years. Sadly we know from our work at Brook, and that of Diversity Role Models, Stonewall and others that homophobic bullying is alive, well, and in some cases thriving in our schools. There was however some good news last year in Stonewall's school report showing that some progress is being made in tackling homophobia in schools. There is of course so much more to do to support teachers, change cultures and ensure all children and young people regardless of gender and sexuality are safe and nurtured in all schools, including those 'with religious character.'

Only last week Brook and FPA had feedback from qualitative research commissioned in Further Education settings where young LGBT people said that their sex and relationships education can seem irrelevant and only targeted at heterosexual young people – their message was clear – unless we are actively and explicitly inclusive of different sexualities and identities they will often feel excluded and disengaged. Evidence has shown the same is true of resources and services – unless they say they are for people with all different identities there is an implicit assumption that the service, leaflet or website is not for diverse groups of young people. Almost 20 years ago in Sheffield they produced wallet sized cards advertising services that said Young Gay People welcome, and they found an increase in the numbers of young people identifying as gay attended the services.

So my conclusion is it's time to stop talking about Section 28 as much as possible so its legacy does not destroy the confidence of another generation of teachers to talk about different sexualities in the classroom with confidence, and hijack another generation of children and young people's education and ultimately their safety and happiness.

Successive governments have shamefully ignored expert advice, the consensus and evidence about PSHE and wasted the opportunity to ensure PSHE makes a positive contribution to reducing homophobia and celebrating equality and diversity. And after the publication of the PSHE review we now know there isn't going to be new sex and relationships education guidance from government so it's down to schools, charities, experts, unions and determined individuals. Despite all the challenges there is much wider support for the work to promote positive sexual identities and reduce homophobia – there is a consensus that we need to make schools safe for all children even if there isn't always the skill, expertise and priority afforded to the issue.

Stonewall have some excellent resources for use in the classroom and support for schools which you can find out more about at www.stonewall.org.uk.

Diversity Role Models takes LGBT role models into school and provides workshops. For more information visit www.diversityrolemodels.org.
Finally last year a group of young volunteers at Brook developed a leaflet called Learn your LGBT ABC because they wanted a resource that could help young people understand that sexuality is diverse, life affirming and individual, not a label, a problem or a veritable political football. It’s a useful positive and affirming resource to trigger discussions. You can find out more about how to order the leaflet at www.brook.org.uk.

I have also just finished reading Maggie and Me by Damian Barr. I recommend it to you.

Follow on Twitter: @simonablake @BrookCharity @BeSexPositive

Responding to the Publication of the Government's PSHE Education Review

Personal, Social Health and Economic (PSHE) education is vital for children and young people. It is as important as reading, writing and arithmetic (and IT) yet it continues to be the 'Cinderella subject' of the school curriculum; neglected and ignored. Last month, the Government announced it would not be making PSHE education statutory in primary or secondary schools. Brook, like many organisations, believes this undermines children's rights, their health and their safety.

Young people are talented, resourceful, resilient and creative and even though many of them navigate life's path with few serious problems, everyone; parents, politicians, professionals and young people themselves, worry about them. We see the headlines: teenage pregnancy, smoking, obesity, substance misuse, sexual exploitation, female genital mutilation, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, domestic violence and violence against girls and women, bullying including homophobic and sexual bullying and gangs. These are real and valid health and social concerns that require public and political attention, particularly in the context of the unprecedented economic and social change we are facing.

When they get excellent PSHE education, children and young people can learn about many of the issues that might affect their health and happiness. Things like relationships, sex, alcohol and other drugs, eating and fitness. Good PSHE education helps to develop vital personal and social skills, positive values, an understanding of equality and diversity and the importance of individual rights and responsibilities. PSHE education is not a magic bullet but where it is done well in primary and secondary schools it is proven to make a difference to young lives.

Last month, the Government had the chance to make sure all young people got good quality PSHE education with the publication of their long overdue PSHE education review. They could have made a simple, cost effective, workable change. Instead the Department for Education (DfE) chose the status quo.

The decision not to make PSHE education statutory flies in the face of children's rights as set out in the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, ratified in the UK in 1989 and works against other government departments' aspirations to improve PSHE education. The Department of Health (DH) thinks children and young people should have good Sex and Relationships Education (SRE), so does the Home office. DfE itself has stressed the importance of PSHE education and said it wanted young people to have good SRE (though obviously not enough to make sure that actually happens).

And it gets worse. Not only has the Government ruled out statutory PSHE education, its consultation on the national curriculum proposes watering down the minimal (but important) content in the science curriculum that contributes to good PSHE education. The review proposes;

• At key stage one, the names of genitals are not included in the requirements to teach 'basic parts of the body'. This matters because children need a language to describe their bodies if they need to ask for help.
• An unnecessary note tells teachers that pupils in key stage 2 'should not be expected to understand how human reproduction occurs' and there is no mention of puberty for children who need support and preparation for a huge change in their lives.
• The specific reference to 'sexual health' has been removed from the proposed new Key Stage 3 science curriculum and there is advice in the new Key Stage 3 content that learning about the structure and function of the male and female reproductive system should not include hormones.

The new proposals make a fudge of teaching children essential aspects of the science of their bodies, simply because some people feel a bit icky about sex and relationships.

We know that some schools take their responsibilities to young people seriously. Some schools deliver all of PSHE education well and some schools deliver parts of it well. But it's not required in law that every school teaches a minimum content or to a required standard. Teachers cannot train to be PSHE education specialists in their initial teacher training. As a result some children get very good PSHE education, and others get the absolute bare minimum required by law - the science of reproduction and infections (now under threat).

It is clear then why so many parents, professionals and organisations, including teaching unions, are deeply concerned that the Government has opted for more of the same rather than facilitate systemic changes in teacher training, curriculum planning and delivery.

Introducing PSHE education as a statutory subject in schools would be relatively low cost and high impact. It would reach the majority of children and young people with the core information and skills to help them manage their lives now and in the future. It would provide teachers with the essential training and skills they need to teach the subject well and it would make a proper difference to many of the problems that young people face today.

To refuse to take this opportunity and to propose the watering down of the science curriculum at a time when other sources of information and advice in the youth and community are being cut is short sighted and ill considered.

This decision fails children and young people. It ignores the consensus in this country in support of PSHE education and it ignores the evidence. It also overlooks the fact that the status quo does not work. Now it's time to work with schools and their community partners to support them to do the right and moral thing by children and ensure that PSHE education gets the time, attention and position it requires in school life.

A day to be pleased with

Today the Office for National Statistics released the latest teenage pregnancy data for 2008 and Ed Balls, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, announced the continuation of the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy in England.

Since 1998 teenage pregnancy rates for under 18s have reduced by 13.3% to 40.4 per 1,000 for 2008. This is good news and we now need to continue doing what we know works; improving access to sexual health services, good quality sex and relationships education in school and the community and supporting parents to talk to their children about relationships.

I really welcome the refresh of the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy and the renewed commitment to young people’s sexual health. There is some excellent work taking place in some areas and what we need to do now is to learn from those areas who have seen the biggest decreases and make that excellent work the standard for all teenage pregnancy programmes.

Yesterday the Children, Schools and Families Bill which includes making Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) Education statutory completed its report stage and third reading in the House of Commons.

We eagerly await its progress through the House of Lords and the Bill receiving Royal Assent before it becomes law. Making PSHE Education statutory will provide a clear framework and ensure that it will be inclusive of every child and young person combining legal/civil rights, health, and cultural and religious perspectives.

Every day at Brook we see young people whose education about relationships and sex has not been good enough. For too long young people have been saying that the sex education they receive is too little, too late and too biological because schools are only required to teach what is in the science curriculum. Statutory PSHE will mean that all children and young people will receive the education and information they are entitled to.

Statutory PSHE Education

Children and young people want it, most parents want it and in October 2008 at long last this government showed leadership on it by announcing the intention to make Personal, Social, Health and Economic Education statutory. For many of us campaigning with and for children and young people this signalled the end of an era. The door was open. It was going to happen. Albeit slightly slower than expected. And as we gallop towards a general election with a short parliamentary session, I believe the door is still open.

Has the amendment laid down by Ed Balls, Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, that provides school with right to teach PSHE Education in line with their religious character really provided an opt out for faith schools?

Was the amendment necessary? Not in my view. Is the amendment devastating? Probably not as long as schools know what they must deliver. Will it reassure some? Probably.

It is always important to know what you are arguing about. It seems to me that PSHE Education is becoming a battleground for age old arguments about state aided 'faith based schools'. Regardless of the school, PSHE Education has to be as good as it can be, and that is what this legislation must seek to ensure.

Legislating for Statutory PSHE Education is morally and socially right. It should have happened at least five years ago and must get through now. If it gets through, it will bring about systemic change and real, lasting benefit to children and young people in line with the Every Child Matters agenda. Let's keep our eyes and our minds on the big prize, statutory PSHE that will help drive standards up. This legislation, with all its limitations is worth our support.

A new headline and my tube friend

Thankfully I rarely use the tube to get around London, preferring instead to hotfoot it on my fold away bike, but yesterday I didn't have the physical energy to cycle so I ended up on the tube.

As I sat down, the man next to me was reading his Metro paper. As he turned the page I saw the headline 'transexual lessons for five year olds'. Now I have seen plenty of 'sex lessons for five year olds' and 'gay lessons for four year olds' headlines and expect to see many more, but this was a first.

So i (annoyingly) tried to read the article over his shoulder. He (annoyingly) decided he didn't want me to read over his shoulder and repositioned his paper. Normally the tube is littered with people's read free papers by 7.30, but not yesterday. So unable to wait I had to ask if I could please read the article about transexual lessons for five years.

He gave me the paper, i scanned the article as quickly as possible to learn that this is a non story. And that it was reporting on the fact that as part of PSHE Education children will learn about equality and domestic violence. There was nothing new in it, so why the new headline? As i read the article I sighed and shook my head and muttered this is ridiculous. I thought I was quiet, but my fast becoming friend - lets call him Sam - agreed, although misunderstood what i thought was ridiculous, so actually we disagreed because he thought transexual lessons for five year olds was ridiculous and a signal this government had lost the plot.

Now what annoys me to hell about this is that in the space of three tube stops he learnt quite a lot about PSHE Education and cheerily claimed to be an advocate as I hopped off at Euston. And I learnt first hand from your average (sorry Sam you were by no means average) about the insidious role of those tedious headlines on rational people's understanding of what children will be taught in school, and it breeds fear and suspicion and contempt about an area of education that is absolutely right and moral that it is taught in schools working in partnership with parents.

So the curriculum isn't changing, but the headlines are - what will the headline be next? Ideas on this blog!

National Chlamydia Screening Programme must continue

Today the National Audit Office has published its report on the National Chlamydia Screening Programme in England. In making its assessment of the value of the programme it charts some of the challenges of implementing a national programme when local Health Bodies have responsibility for delivery. It does say that the programme has not demonstrated value for money to date. And of course the danger is we look backwards not forward, and we lose the good news in with that headline. The report goes on to say that the programme and other sites, including GUM services are now reaching a level of testing which will begin to make a difference to the amount of chlamydia within the population. All national strategies take a while to bed down and we are now getting there - continued investment is vital if we are to build on the successes to date, and ensure that all, not just some, areas are doing excellently - every area will be doing something well and we need to escalate efforts to share best practice.

The report sets out some important areas for change to ensure that moving forward the programme makes a difference. For my money, there are some important wins some of which the NCSP are already moving forward on including providing guidance on how much a test should cost so there are not such big discrepancies between areas.

From a young people's perspective 45 brands does not make sense - we need to have one national brand, locally developed and tailored so young people really know what chlamydia is, how to prevent it and where to get tested if they need to even if they move between PCT boundaries and regions. We also need one national high quality website so young people can access tests on line. At Brook young people contact us asking how to get a kit online and I worry about the variation in quality of service young people get with our current arrangements of local websites (or indeed no websites). Given where the programme is and the way health policy has developed, I don't underestimate the challenge in national branding or a national website, but for the sake of young people and getting the best bang for our buck we must grasp the nettle.

So, when I am asked by journalists whether the NCSP should continue, yes absolutely it must. There is no doubt in my mind.

And last week Ed Balls, Secretary of State for Children announced that PSHE Education will become a statutory part of the curriculum in England. For many of us, including myself this announcement is long overdue and very very welcome. I keep on pinching myself - having personally worked and campaigned for this at least a decade, along with colleagues who have been pushing even longer, this is a triumph that is a defining moment in our history. For far too long children and young people have been telling us their PSHE including learning about sex and relationships is not good enough - that it needs more time, that it needs enough interest and skill from people teaching the subject and that it needs to help them address real life dilemmas more effectively. Of course this is not the end of the journey - statutory provision is not a magic bullet or a panacea, but it is a huge step forward. I urge everyone who supports PSHE Education to contact their local MP and make sure they support the move as it makes its way through the parliamentary process. We have government commitment to the destination, now we just have to make sure we get there. There will be others who don't agree making their voices heard very loudly - we cannot afford to be complacent.