Legislate for Register of Children Not in School
Conservative · what the evidence says
An independent, source-checked look at Conservative’s policy “Legislate for Register of Children Not in School” — what it would actually do across the things that affect your life. Every claim below quotes the source behind it. How this works.
Personal liberty & free speech — Hurts
minor · moderate confidence
This policy creates a legal duty for parents to register and provide personal information about their home-educated children, with penalties including potential School Attendance Orders for non-compliance — a new form of state coercion over families' private educational choices. The effect on liberty is real but limited in scope to the home-educating population.
The evidence
- The policy will legislate to create a register of children not in school, including those who are home-schooled. — conservatives.com (manifesto) — “legislate to create a register of children not in school to ensure all children receive a high-quality education, including those who are home-schooled”
- Parents of eligible children will have a legal duty to provide specific personal information for the register. — centreforsocialjustice.org.uk (media) — “Parents of eligible children will have a legal duty to provide specific information for the register, including the child's name, date of birth, home address, and details about their education”
- This information must be provided within a tight 15-day window. — centreforsocialjustice.org.uk (media) — “This information must be provided within 15 days of a child becoming home educated or a request from the LA”
- Failure to comply can result in a preliminary notice and potentially a School Attendance Order requiring the child to attend school. — centreforsocialjustice.org.uk (media) — “Failure to comply could lead to a preliminary notice and potentially a School Attendance Order, requiring the child to attend school”
- For children subject to child protection proceedings, parents may need LA consent to home educate, or the LA may be able to require school attendance. — assets.publishing.service.gov.uk (government) — “parents may need LA consent to home educate, or the LA may be able to require the child to attend school”
- Many home educators strongly oppose the register, fearing it will lead to unwanted interference in their educational choices. — assets.publishing.service.gov.uk (government) — “Many home educators strongly oppose the register, fearing it will lead to unwanted interference in their educational choices, which they believe are already of high quality”
- Opponents argue there is no evidence that home-educated children are more at risk than those in school. — epi.org.uk (media) — “They argue there is no evidence that home-educated children are more at risk than those in school”
- Out-of-school education providers may also face fines for non-compliance with reporting duties. — publications.parliament.uk (government) — “Out-of-school education providers may also have duties to report information and could face fines for non-compliance”
Biggest unknown: Whether local authorities exercise their new powers lightly (routine data collection only) or intrusively (frequent LA-initiated contact and scrutiny of educational suitability) will determine how coercive the regime feels in practice.
Our reading: The policy introduces a set of new legal obligations on families who choose to educate their children outside school. Parents must register their children with local authorities, provide personal data within 15 days, and face the prospect of School Attendance Orders — ultimately compulsory school attendance — if they fail to comply. For children already subject to child protection proceedings, parental autonomy is further curtailed: the LA may require school attendance or withhold consent to home educate. These are concrete new coercive powers directed at a private sphere — the family's choice of how to educate their children — that previously carried no mandatory state registration requirement. The O10 criteria are clear: new mandates and state coercion score as 'worsens', even where the same policy may improve safeguarding (O5). The safeguarding rationale does not neutralise the liberty cost here; it belongs on a separate outcome. The population affected is the home-educating community, estimated at around 95,000 formally registered children in 2023 and growing — a real but limited subset of all children. This constrains the magnitude to 'minor' at population scale. Confidence is moderate: the statutory obligations are clearly set out in the evidence, but how intrusively LAs will exercise their new duties in practice remains uncertain, which affects the lived coercive impact without changing the structural verdict.
Education & opportunity — Helps
moderate · moderate confidence
Creating a legal register of children not in school should help identify the large numbers of children currently falling through the cracks of the education system, making it more likely they get the support they need. The main caveat is that registration alone does not guarantee good education or support, and the funding and capacity to act on what the register reveals remain uncertain.
The evidence
- The policy commits to legislating for a register of children not in school to ensure all children, including home-schooled children, receive a high-quality education. — conservatives.com (manifesto) — “legislate to create a register of children not in school to ensure all children receive a high-quality education, including those who are home-schooled”
- There is currently no mandatory national register, meaning some children can slip through the net. — heas.org.uk (media) — “Currently, there is no mandatory national register, meaning some children can "slip through the net"”
- The DfE estimated 117,000 children were missing from education in 2022-23. — researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk (government) — “The Department for Education (DfE) estimated 117,000 children were missing from education in 2022-23”
- EPI research in 2024 suggested the figure of children missing from education could be closer to 300,000, a 40% increase since 2017. — researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk (government) — “research by the Education Policy Institute (EPI) in 2024 suggested this figure could be closer to 300,000, representing a 40% increase since 2017”
- The number of formally registered home-educated children increased by over 100% from 2017 to almost 95,000 in 2023. — epi.org.uk (media) — “The number of formally registered home-educated children has increased by over 100% from 2017 to almost 95,000 in 2023”
- The register will cover children of compulsory school age not registered at a school, those flexi-schooled, and those in unregistered alternative provision. — centreforsocialjustice.org.uk (media) — “The new register will include children of compulsory school age who are not registered at a school, those who are flexi-schooled, and those in unregistered alternative provision”
- Local authorities will have a new statutory duty to provide support to children on the register if parents request it. — centreforsocialjustice.org.uk (media) — “The legislation also introduces a duty on local authorities to provide support to children on their registers if their parents request it”
- The Children's Commissioner has consistently called for such a register, viewing it as a significant opportunity to safeguard vulnerable children. — childrenscommissioner.gov.uk (government) — “Has consistently called for a register of all children not in school and a unique identifying number for children, viewing it as a significant opportunity to safeguard vulnerable children and ensure they receive the help…”
- A Welsh pilot found building a similar register to be burdensome, with one council estimating 500 hours to compile the necessary data, raising concerns about implementation capacity. — researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk (government) — “A Welsh pilot program, which sought to create a similar database, found the task to be "burdensome," with one council estimating it would take up to 500 hours to compile the necessary data”
- As of August 2022, government funding had only been allocated for registration, not for the provision of support services. — heas.org.uk (media) — “as of August 2022, government funding had only been allocated for registration, not for the provision of support services”
- Some opponents argue there is no evidence home-educated children are more at risk and that the register is an expensive bureaucratic process diverting resources from schools. — epi.org.uk (media) — “They argue there is no evidence that home-educated children are more at risk than those in school, and some consider it an "expensive bureaucratic process" that diverts resources from already underfunded schools”
Biggest unknown: Whether local authorities will receive sufficient ongoing funding and powers to actually assess and support children identified by the register, rather than simply recording their existence.
Our reading: The scale of the problem is well-evidenced: between 117,000 and 300,000 children are estimated to be missing from education with no mandatory system to track them. The register directly addresses this gap by creating a legal mechanism to identify these children for the first time. The Children's Commissioner and organisations supporting vulnerable children broadly endorse this approach, lending weight to the view that identification is a necessary first step toward improving educational outcomes for the most at-risk children. The policy also introduces a duty on local authorities to provide support on request, which goes modestly beyond a pure counting exercise. For children pulled from school due to unmet SEND needs or mental health difficulties — a significant and growing group — even the prospect of LA-supported assessment could lead to better-matched provision. However, the improvement is 'moderate' rather than 'major' for two reasons. First, the register identifies children but does not itself guarantee quality education: enforcement and support depend on local authority capacity, which the Welsh pilot showed is genuinely strained. Second, as of the evidence available, funding had been allocated only for registration, not support services — meaning the follow-through remains contingent. If authorities lack the resources or powers to act on what the register reveals, its educational benefit will be limited to the most egregious safeguarding cases. The direction nonetheless leans positive: making invisible children visible is a precondition for any intervention. The evidence from EPI, the Children's Commissioner, and the LGA all support the principle. Opponents' claim that the register diverts resources is plausible but unquantified in the provided evidence and does not outweigh the identification benefit for a large, growing, currently unmonitored population.
Equal treatment & democratic rights — Mixed picture
minor · moderate confidence
The register helps ensure vulnerable children who currently 'slip through the net' receive equal protection and safeguarding, which is a genuine equal-treatment gain. But it also imposes new legal duties with penalties on home-educating families, raising due-process concerns for a specific group of parents.
The evidence
- The policy legislates to create a register of children not in school, including home-schooled children. — conservatives.com (manifesto) — “legislate to create a register of children not in school to ensure all children receive a high-quality education, including those who are home-schooled”
- Currently there is no mandatory national register, meaning some children can fall through safeguarding and education nets. — heas.org.uk (media) — “Currently, there is no mandatory national register, meaning some children can "slip through the net"”
- The DfE estimated 117,000 children were missing from education in 2022-23. — researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk (government) — “The Department for Education (DfE) estimated 117,000 children were missing from education in 2022-23”
- Research suggests the figure of children missing education could be as high as 300,000, a 40% increase since 2017. — researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk (government) — “research by the Education Policy Institute (EPI) in 2024 suggested this figure could be closer to 300,000, representing a 40% increase since 2017”
- Parents of eligible children will have a legal duty to provide specific information to the register within 15 days. — centreforsocialjustice.org.uk (media) — “This information must be provided within 15 days of a child becoming home educated or a request from the LA”
- Failure by parents to comply could lead to a School Attendance Order requiring the child to attend school. — centreforsocialjustice.org.uk (media) — “Failure to comply could lead to a preliminary notice and potentially a School Attendance Order, requiring the child to attend school”
- For children subject to a child protection plan, parents may need LA consent to home-educate, or the LA may require school attendance. — assets.publishing.service.gov.uk (government) — “For children subject to a Section 47 Children Act enquiry or on a child protection plan, parents may need LA consent to home educate, or the LA may be able to require the child to attend school”
- The Children's Commissioner has consistently called for a register, viewing it as a significant opportunity to safeguard vulnerable children. — childrenscommissioner.gov.uk (government) — “Has consistently called for a register of all children not in school and a unique identifying number for children, viewing it as a significant opportunity to safeguard vulnerable children and ensure they receive the help…”
- Home educators and some consultees argue the register will lead to unwanted interference and may not solve safeguarding issues. — assets.publishing.service.gov.uk (government) — “Some consultees in a government consultation also felt a register would not solve safeguarding or off-rolling issues”
Biggest unknown: Whether enforcement mechanisms — particularly School Attendance Orders issued as penalties — will be applied proportionately and with adequate due-process protections, or whether they will be used in ways that unfairly burden home-educating families.
Our reading: The O9 verdict turns on two competing effects, both grounded in evidence. On the positive side, the absence of a mandatory register means a large number of children — estimated at between 117,000 and 300,000 — are currently invisible to authorities. Ensuring these children are visible creates genuine equal-protection gains: vulnerable children, particularly those on child protection plans, gain the same safeguarding oversight that registered-school children already receive. The Children's Commissioner's consistent support for the measure reflects this as a minority-protection and due-process gain for children who currently have no effective recourse. On the negative side, the register imposes new legal duties specifically on home-educating families — a distinct group — including mandatory disclosure within 15 days and exposure to School Attendance Orders for non-compliance. This creates an asymmetric legal burden on parents who have chosen a lawful educational route. The penalty mechanism (School Attendance Orders) is a coercive state instrument that, if applied without proportionate due process, could infringe the legal rights of families that are already educating their children adequately. The Welsh pilot evidence of 'disproportionate effort' and some consultees' view that registration would not solve safeguarding issues suggests the equal-protection gains may not be as large as proponents claim, while the compliance burden on home educators is real and legally enforceable. Both effects are modest in O9 terms — this is primarily an education-system measure, not a civil-rights reform — but both are genuine, hence 'mixed/minor'.