Training sessions for new attendance guidance

Adam Luke, Department for Education (DfE) School Attendance Policy lead, outlines what the new attendance guidance means for schools and academy trusts.

What the new attendance guidance means for schools and academy trusts

Jayne Lowe, DfE Attendance Adviser, sets out what makes an effective school-level attendance policy.

Setting up an effective school attendance policy

Star Academies share how they ensure the attendance register is completed consistently across their schools. Their presentation also covers the trust’s day-to-day processes to monitor, follow up and improve attendance.

Attendance coding practice and day-to-day processes

Sapientia Education Trust share how they work with families, local authorities and other partners effectively to maximise attendance.

Working with families, local authorities and other partners effectively to maximise attendance

Diverse Academies share how they use governance to support better attendance across their trust and academies.

Effective governance to support better attendance

Star Academies share how they analyse absence and attendance data to target and monitor improvement efforts. This presentation also includes a demonstration of the daily attendance reports that all schools can register for and access for free.

School attendance guidance training webinar – analysing absence and attendance data

Whole trust and school approaches to improving attendance webinars

Primary

Aaron Wright, Executive Headteacher, and Luke Renwick, Headteacher, of Brook House Primary School, share how they have created a culture of excellent attendance through a pastoral approach that has significantly reduced the number of pupils who are persistently absent.

A pastoral approach – Brook House Primary School

Kelly Moore, Principal at Ormiston Meadows Academy, shares the strategies they have implemented with various cohorts of pupils to significantly reduce persistent absence across the school.

Reducing persistent absence – Ormiston Meadows Academy

Secondary

Michael Robson, Executive Principal of North Shore Academy, shares their approach for managing and improving attendance in schools in the Northern Education Trust, including work they did during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Managing and improving attendance in a multi-academy trust – Northern Education Trust

Jamie Stubbs, Assistant Headteacher with responsibility for inclusion, safeguarding and attendance at St Thomas More Catholic Academy, shares how they have managed to improve attendance levels to above national averages.

Improving attendance to above national averages – St Thomas More Catholic Academy

Diane Henson, Headteacher at Wheelers Lane Technology College, shares the strategies they’ve successfully implemented to improve attendance for pupils at their secondary boys’ school.

Successful attendance implementation – Wheelers Lane Technology College

Sue Huntley, Deputy Principal of Studio West, shares how they use their curriculum and other strategies to improve attendance in their 11 to 19 studio school.

Improving attendance in a studio school – Studio West

Special and alternative provision (AP)

Wayne Askham, Head of the Abbey School, shares how they use their curriculum, incentives and rewards, and other strategies to improve attendance in their 5 to 19 special school.

Using curriculum, incentives and rewards – Abbey School

Matthew Rooney, Principal of St Giles School, shares the actions they have taken to reduce the attendance gap between their 3 to 18 special school and other mainstream settings nationally.

Closing the attendance gap – St Giles School

Bromley Trust Academy Alternative Provision share the actions they take at trust, school and pupil level to raise attendance significantly above national AP averages.

Raising AP attendance averages – Bromley Trust Academy

Trust

Michelle O’Dell shares an insight into her role as Attendance Intervention Manager for John Taylor Multi Academy Trust. This includes strategies for monitoring and improving attendance across all the schools in the trust.

Using an Attendance Intervention Manager to improve rates – John Taylor Multi-Academy Trust

Ofsted

Susan Morris-King, one of His Majesty’s Inspectors and Ofsted’s National Lead for behaviour and attendance, reports on the main findings of Ofsted’s ‘Securing good attendance and tackling persistent absence’ report.

Ofsted findings on securing good attendance and tackling persistent absence

Schools have shared their techniques for:

Guidance is available on:

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a unique peer review mechanism of the United Nations Human Rights Council that scrutinises the human rights record of every UN Member State once every 5 years. This session, the last of the current UPR cycle, reviewed 12 States: Togo, Syria, Iceland, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Lithuania, Uganda, Timor-Leste, Moldova, South Sudan, Haiti and Sudan.

As the world emerges from the Covid-19 pandemic, it brings with it 160 million children in child labour: an increase of over 8 million in the last four years. This is a clear demonstration of why we, and our partners around the world, must continue doing all we can to eradicate the heinous crimes of modern slavery as agreed through Sustainable Development Goal 8.7, by taking immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking, and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour.
In this final session of the third cycle we have encouraged implementation of National Action Plans including improving protection for victims; establishing and implementing guidelines for first responders; criminalising child, early and forced marriages; and increasing training for police, prosecutors and judges to identify and prosecute modern slavery abuses.

This session we continued to advocate strengthening the quality, independence and diversity of Treaty Body membership. These expert bodies are a central part of the UN human rights system, charged with monitoring the implementation of human rights conventions in states which have signed up to them.

I remain appalled by the Assad government’s treatment of its people. Women and girls suffer disproportionately, caught between the conflict, the ensuing economic crisis, and sexual and gender-based violence. I strongly condemn the regime’s attacks on civilians and infrastructure and I call on Syria to: immediately end the systemic practice of enforced disappearance, arbitrary arrests, detention and torture; end all attacks on civilians and facilitate unconstrained access for humanitarian actors and independent international human rights monitors; and prohibit and criminalise the use and recruitment of child soldiers in armed conflict.

I welcome the arrival of the OHCHR and other UN actors in Venezuela. I am deeply concerned by their reports including on the use of the justice system to undermine democracy and urge Venezuela to allow unhindered humanitarian access. I recommend Venezuela: take urgent steps to end forced labour, sexual exploitation and human trafficking in the Arco Minero del Orinoco; ensure sexual and reproductive health and rights for all; and respect political parties’ independence, lift arbitrary disqualifications of dissident leaders and cease to override Venezuelans’ will through court decisions.

In Zimbabwe, I acknowledge the repeal of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act and welcome the launch of Zimbabwe’s national disability policy. However, I am concerned by restrictions on freedom of assembly, the harassment of journalists, opposition and civil society, and constitutional amendments which risk reducing judicial independence. I call on Zimbabwe to increase access to basic documentation, tackle gender-based violence and hold accountable those individuals responsible for human rights violations. I recommend that Zimbabwe fully implement the Motlanthe Commission of Inquiry Report and 2018 Election Observer Report recommendations, and align the Marriages Act with the constitution to criminalise child, early and forced marriage.

While I welcome the progress that has been made by South Sudan since 2015, including through the 2018 Revitalised Peace Agreement, the human rights situation on the ground remains deeply worrying. Violations and abuses, including sexual violence, arbitrary detentions, extrajudicial killings, and attacks on freedom of expression continue with apparent impunity. Civilians, civil society and humanitarian workers, including journalists, must be protected. Violations against children, including their recruitment as child soldiers, must end. We hope to see continued cooperation with the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, with the support of both the international community and South Sudan, to allow it to continue its vital work.

The UK has consistently and strongly condemned the 25 October 2021 military coup in Sudan, as well as the subsequent arbitrary arrest and detention of civilians, and violence against protestors. I do so once again. The Sudanese military must fully respect and protect all human rights and to deliver justice and accountability for all human rights violations and abuses. Civic space must be immediately reopened and fully protected. The rights to freedom of expression and assembly of all people in Sudan, including civil society actors, human rights defenders and journalists, must be defended. And the UN-facilitated process that seeks to lead to the restoration of Sudan’s civilian-led government, must be engaged with fully and in good faith by all parties.

As a strong supporter of the UPR mechanism, I am proud that the UK has participated actively in every State review since the beginning of the first cycle, delivering a clear statement on how we see the human rights situation in every State under review, without fear or favour.

During the third cycle of the UPR, I am proud that the UK proposed a total of more than 500 recommendations, and sent more than 600 advance questions to States. I note that the UK is one of a few States that routinely sends advance questions, and we hope others will note the value of this practice, and take a similar approach in future.

With the end of the third cycle, the UK looks forward to continuing its active participation in the UPR process. We will be one of the first States to come under Review at the beginning of the fourth cycle, and we will approach our Review in the same spirit we would wish all States to exemplify

Madam President

Thank you for convening this plenary this morning. It is a valuable opportunity to reflect on what we have heard from our high level visitors this week, and what it means for the work of our Conference.

As Lord Ahmad told this Conference on Monday, Russia’s unprovoked and premeditated attack against Ukraine, a sovereign, democratic state, casts a dark shadow over our work. The ultimate objective of this Conference is to contribute to international peace and security and to prevent war. So when one member of this Conference invades another member, we cannot stay silent.

In the last week, Ukraine has suffered horrific attacks. Missiles and air strikes have torn through apartment blocks. Innocent people including children have lost their lives and the Ukrainian people have endured widespread suffering. The invading Russian armed forces have bombarded civilian targets, including residential areas. They are responsible for hundreds of civilian casualties, including growing numbers of children.

As President of the Convention on Cluster Munitions, the United Kingdom is in particular gravely concerned about reports of the use of cluster munitions. More generally, we have been working closely with a large number of partners to expedite an International Criminal Court investigation into Russian war crimes in Ukraine, including its use of indiscriminate force against Ukrainian civilians.

As a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council, Russia has a particular responsibility to uphold international peace and security. Instead, it is violating the borders of another sovereign country and repudiating the principles that every country has committed to uphold. It is now vital that Russia urgently de-escalates and withdraws its troops. It must be held accountable and stop undermining democracy, global stability, and international law.

The UK and our international partners stand united in condemning the Russian government’s reprehensible actions, which are an egregious violation of international law and the UN Charter and show flagrant disregard for its commitments under the Budapest Memorandum and the Minsk Agreements.

The UK stands with Ukraine and will always defend the Ukrainian people’s right to choose their own destiny. We are joined in our outrage by friends and allies around the world. We will work with them – for however long it takes – to ensure that the sovereignty and independence of Ukraine is restored, and that Russia is held accountable for its aggression.

We also condemn Russia’s campaign of disinformation, which has included numerous attempts at staging false pretexts for war. Most notable amongst them for this Conference is the ridiculous claim, repeated by the Russian Foreign Minister here on Tuesday, on nuclear weapons. It is important to re-state the facts. Ukraine acceded to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1994 as a non-nuclear weapon state, and voluntarily returned to Russia the nuclear weapons that were on its territory from the time of independence from the USSR. In doing so, Ukraine received security assurances from the United States, the UK and Russia in the Budapest Memorandum against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine – assurances which Russia has flagrantly disregarded. There is no evidence whatsoever that Ukraine has been developing or seeking to develop nuclear weapons, and it is shameful that the Russian government continues to conduct this sort of misinformation operation in a transparent attempt to justify the unjustifiable. No, let us be clear: this is President Putin’s war of choice.

In a similar vein, Russia’s false statements in the lead-up to their premeditated invasion about chemical weapons attacks being prepared by Ukraine are another example of this type of disinformation. If any country represented in this room has a track record of using, or covering for others’ use of chemical weapons, it is the Russian Federation. Let me remind them that the world is watching their actions closely.

Let me now offer some reflections on the implications of these developments for our work here in the Conference on Disarmament, and in the disarmament machinery more generally.

First, as we all know, it is impossible to disentangle work on disarmament from the prevailing security environment. That cuts both ways: Russia’s aggression will clearly have an impact on the security calculations of other countries. But it also makes it more important than ever for the international community to revitalise our commitment to arms control and disarmament.

That must start with consolidating and strengthening our existing frameworks, and with calling out non-compliance. This year, we very much hope to finally hold the Tenth Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the Ninth Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention. We must seize the opportunity to strengthen both those vital Conventions.

Second, in periods of heightened international tension we must continue to build trust and reduce the risk of conflict and escalation through misinterpretation and miscalculation. Nowhere is this more important than on nuclear issues. The UK remains firmly committed to making progress with other NPT Nuclear Weapon States on disarmament and strategic risk reduction. All States Parties to the NPT recognise the “devastation that would be visited upon all mankind by a nuclear war and the consequent need to make every effort to avert the danger of such a war”, as the preamble to that Treaty puts it. Reducing the risk of nuclear war is amongst the foremost responsibilities of the Nuclear Weapon States. The UK takes its responsibilities seriously and calls on the other nuclear powers to stand by those words, and the statement we jointly adopted only two months ago, and engage seriously in efforts to reduce the risk of misinterpretation and miscalculation.

Finally, we need to look again at those areas of arms control where the rules are weakest, or where escalations are most likely to break out. For the Conference on Disarmament, there are two key areas; they are familiar, but they bear repeating. First, we must immediately commence negotiations on a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. Second, it is particularly important to make progress on work to prevent an arms race in outer space in a holistic manner and avoid a narrow focus on the placement of weapons in space. The UK-led approach on responsible space behaviours aims to avoid miscalculations and escalation that could lead to conflict and ensure that our discussions and negotiations keep pace with fast-moving technology developments and includes all State threats in space and on Earth.

It is down to all of us to work together on the issues we face with a constructive attitude to secure a safe, peaceful and more prosperous world for generations to come. The Subsidiary Bodies give us a good opportunity to get into the detail of these and other related points.

For today, though, let me conclude by reiterating the UK’s solidarity with the President, government and people of Ukraine in their hour of extreme need. Their courage and determination is an inspiration to us all. As yesterday’s vote in the General Assembly showed clearly, the world stands with them.

Thank you Mr Chair. We meet here today to discuss the war that Russia has unleashed against Ukraine – its sovereign and democratic neighbour. A war that was unprovoked, premeditated and entirely unjustifiable, and for which President Putin and the Russian government bear the sole, heinous responsibility.

The United Kingdom condemns in the strongest terms the Russian government’s bombardment of Ukrainian villages, towns and cities. We are deeply saddened by the death of Maryna Fenina, who was killed by shelling in Kharkiv. Our thoughts are with all the victims and their families.

Since we last met in this hall on Sunday, the Russian military has intensified its use of rocket artillery, including in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Chernihiv, Kherson and Mariupol, and as we have heard from the distinguished mayor, Zhytomyr. On the night of the 27th-28th February, the SMM reported hearing explosions and heavy shelling, including fire from multiple launch rocket systems in areas north and north-east of Kharkiv city.

Russia’s use of heavy artillery in densely populated areas is causing civilian casualties. Since Russia further invaded Ukraine last week through to the 1st March, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has reported that 227 civilians have been killed, including 15 children, and 525 injured. Tragically, the real figure is certain to be far higher.

Russia’s indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks on civilian areas have also affected critical civilian infrastructure. Schools and kindergartens have been damaged and residential buildings destroyed. Critical infrastructure such as gas and water supplies, fuel depots and communications, have also been affected, particularly in eastern Ukraine. UN OCHA have highlighted that the continued operation of critical hospital services is being threatened by constant power outages and the persistent risk of ambulances and health personnel being caught in the crossfire. We were appalled at the strike on the Kyiv TV tower which killed civilians and damaged the Babyn Yar Holocaust memorial. It is vital that the horrors we are witnessing in Ukraine are fully investigated and that those responsible are held to account. That is why the UK and 37 of our allies and partners have referred atrocities in Ukraine to the International Criminal Court.

Mr Chair, we are grateful to ODIHR Director Mecacci for sounding an early alarm about the human impact that Russia’s attack on Ukraine is taking on civilians. We welcome ODIHR’s readiness to keep monitoring the situation. This will be important for ensuring accountability, including for violations of international humanitarian law.

Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian civilians are fleeing the violence perpetrated by Russia. UNHCR estimates that nearly 900,000 Ukrainians have already fled to neighbouring countries and more than 100,000 have been displaced within Ukraine.

We reiterate the 27th February call that we, together with the Polish Chair and 44 other participating States, made on the Russian Federation to implement an immediate ceasefire to allow humanitarian aid to access those in need and prevent hostilities against civilians. International organisations, including the dedicated staff of the SMM who remain in Ukraine, must also be provided safe passage. We are deeply grateful to the Secretary General, the OSCE Secretariat, the SMM leadership and the Polish Chair for their efforts to fulfil the OSCE’s duty of care towards staff in Ukraine.

We are also grateful to the OSCE Representative on the Freedom of the Media, Teresa Ribeiro, for denouncing the Russian government’s attempts to limit the information on Russia’s attack on Ukraine that Russian people can receive through the media.

Despite President Putin’s efforts, he and his government cannot hide the brutality of their attack on Ukraine, either from the world or from the Russian people themselves. We are deeply concerned at the arrest of thousands of peaceful protesters in Russia, including even children, simply for voicing their opposition against this war – this is a grave violation of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. ODIHR have reported on numerous arbitrary arrests and police intimidation, with riot police on some occasions outnumbering protesters. Human rights defenders and journalists have also been arrested.

There have also been unacceptable crackdowns on protests in Belarus, whose government has dragged an unwilling people into the Russian Federation Government’s war against Ukraine. We are deeply concerned at the holding of a referendum, which fell far short of any international standards of democratic best practice, on changes to the Belarusian constitution, including the dropping of Belarus’ neutrality and non-nuclear status. Combined with President Putin’s instruction to Russian nuclear forces to move to high alert status, this is once again elevating risk for no justifiable reason. Due to the role that Belarus is playing in facilitating Russia’s further invasion of Ukraine, the UK announced on 1st March that we would be implementing the first tranches of sanctions over the conflict against Belarussian individuals and organisations. We condemn the role that Belarusian authorities have played so far and urge them to step back from this appalling path being charted by President Putin.

We are also determined to ensure that the Russian government pays the price for their appalling violation of international law and the UN Charter. This is why, the UK, together with our allies, have implemented the biggest sanctions package ever imposed against a G20 nation. And we are not alone in this. Across the world we’ve seen organisations from banks to oil companies, to football leagues make it clear that President Putin and his regime must be isolated from the international community for his actions. At yesterday’s UN General Assembly, 141 countries voted in favour of a resolution condemning Russia’s attack on Ukraine. Russia is now an international pariah.

The UK stands together with Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. We will make the Russian government pay the price of its actions, and we will hold them accountable for their crimes, for as long as it takes. We do not and will never accept the Russian government’s attempts to change borders or impose its influence by force.

I request that this statement be attached to the journal of the day.

Water is about the most important thing there is: it’s essential for life and everything else. Water – its quantity and its quality – is the single biggest X factor for the state of nature. And as someone said to me a few years ago, the thing about water is that it gets everywhere. So you’d better make sure you have the right amount, of the right quality, in the right places.

If we want to fix water we need to fix the climate

Let’s start with the strategic picture. The biggest determinant of the state of our waters in fifty years won’t be what the Environment Agency or Parliament or the government or the water companies do but what happens to our climate.

That’s because climate change is driving heavier and more violent rainfall which is overloading our sewage systems more frequently, leading to more discharges into rivers; overwhelming urban drainage systems more often, causing more surface water flooding in our towns and cities; raising sea levels, causing higher risks of dangerous coastal flooding; washing more contaminants into our rivers, causing greater pollution; and driving hotter temperatures and lower summer rainfall, causing higher drought risk, damaging water quality and killing river wildlife.

So if we want to fix water, we need to fix the climate. The Environment Agency is playing its part in that, by regulating down the emissions of greenhouse gas that cause climate change, by helping communities adapt to its effects through building more flood defences and by helping create more resilient cities through our planning role. We are also walking the walk ourselves with our own commitment to make the EA a net zero carbon emitter by 2030.

Water quality

Water quality is a big issue.

Some things are better than they were. Largely down to tougher regulation, there are now far fewer serious pollution incidents damaging our waters than three decades ago, sewage treatment works now discharge much lower amounts of harmful chemicals into our rivers, and the bathing waters around our coasts are in the best condition they have been since we started monitoring them. As our waters have improved, nature has recovered. Otters, which were almost extinct by the 1960s due to the pesticides then in our rivers have now returned to every county of England.

Some things are flatlining. Only 14% of our rivers meet the criteria for good ecological status, and that number has stayed the same for the last several years. That’s because we are still seeing too much pollution from sewage, farming, industry and road-run off. And some things are getting worse, with new threats to our waters, including microplastics and so-called forever chemicals.

How do we get our water quality to the state we want? Everyone has a role to play. The polluters – largely water companies and farmers – need to obey the law, stop polluting, and pay the full cost of cleaning up any damage they do. The politicians, the public and the media need to keep the pressure on the polluters to clean up their act. The EA and the other regulators need to regulate robustly and have the powers and resources to do so. And all of us need to treat water better and use it wisely.

Water quantity

Water quantity – too much or too little – is an even bigger issue.

Let’s start with too much. We face a growing risk of catastrophic flooding as the climate changes.

Flood defence works: last month the nation faced something we have not seen before – three named storms inside a week. While some 400 properties did sadly flood over that period, our flood defences meant that over 40,000 homes and businesses which would also have flooded did not. And nobody died. Compare that with 1953, when an East Coast storm surge killed over 300 people.

The good news is that over the last decade, while storms and rainfall have progressively worsened, we have actually seen a reduction in the numbers of properties flooded as a direct result of the government’s investment in flood defence. That is why the EA is proud to have completed on time, on target and on budget our last six year flood defence building programme which has better protected 300,000 homes, and why we are now embarking on a new six year programme that is twice the size in terms of cost, more than 50% bigger in terms of the numbers of flood defence schemes we will build, and which will better protect well over 300,000 additional homes and businesses as well as a lot of national infrastructure.

But in the face of the climate emergency, building more flood defences is no longer enough on its own. The Environment Agency’s new flood strategy which we launched in 2020 sets out a new approach: that in addition to continuing to reduce the risk of flooding by building and maintaining flood defences, which we will, we will also help make communities more resilient to flooding when it does happen so lives are not endangered and life can get back to normal quickly afterwards.

We are doing that through our own flood schemes, which also now include property level protection and natural flood management to slow the flow of water and the impact of flooding; by working with water companies and other utilities and with partners like Network Rail and National Highways to help make the country’s infrastructure more resilient; and through our statutory planning role by helping design and build places which are resilient to flooding and other climate shocks.

But the biggest of all risks is not too much water but too little. This is about avoiding what I have called The Jaws of Death: the point on water companies’ planning charts some 20 years from now when if we don’t intervene, the demand for water in this country will outstrip supply. We face that risk due to a toxic combination of the changing climate making water supply more erratic and increasing demand as our population grows.

There’s good news here too. We know how to avoid the jaws of death: reduce demand by using less water more efficiently; and improve supply, including by investing in the right infrastructure. And we have a plan to do that: an initiative the Environment Agency has launched with the water companies, the other regulators and the government, called the National Framework for Water Resources.

This includes hard targets which the water companies have pledged to meet: that the risk of needing severe water restrictions will be limited to no more than 0.2% in any given year; that we will get water consumption down to 110 litres of water per person per day from the current average of 150 litres or more; that water companies will halve leakage, which currently loses around 20% of water put into the public water supply; and develop new supplies through reservoirs and transfers. We are working with the water companies, the other regulators and the government to ensure all this gets done. It’s vital that it does, because while good water quality is essential, the right water quantity is existential.