In June 1994, Unesco invited representatives from 92 governments and 25 international organisations to North West Spain to discuss inclusion.

The Salamanca Statement, the conference communique agreed by delegates and named after the host city, called on governments to “give the highest policy and budgetary priority” to making schools more inclusive for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), and proposed measures to help achieve it.

Thirty years on, what progress has been made?

The policy problem

Despite evidence of its numerous benefits, Unesco’s most recent global audit on inclusive education in 2020 concluded that in many countries the barriers are “still too high for too many learners”.

England, a Salamanca signatory, can count itself among the more pioneering nations in inclusive education. But here, too, progress has stalled. Why? The Unesco audit hints at one particular cause: policy and policymaking.

Since Salamanca, successive policies relating to SEND and inclusion have been understrength, incomplete, lack coherence with and/or are deprioritised in relation to other school-related policies.

In addition, implementation requires the kind of stability and long-term commitment to delivery that underpins the success of frequently lauded systems such as Finland and Estonia, yet is absent from much of the national and local planning in England.

That Estonia’s education system isn’t run by central government may be relevant to its success. After all, in England, the only thing long-term about the education policies of successive governments is their short-termism.

• Why inclusion makes economic sense
• Mainstream pressures impacting special schools
• Faith special schools can help to ease SEND pressure

As such, the recent history of inclusion is a story of achieving marginal gains while leaving structural problems intact. Lately, however, progress has gone from stuttering to stagnant.

Explaining this requires going beyond the policies and considering the roles of politics and policymakers. Think of current inclusion policy as a piece of software. It’s not just badly coded; it’s running on a faulty operating system.

Take the aim of the government’s SEND and Alternative Provision (AP) Improvement Plan to “create a more inclusive society”.

The latest set of reforms to the SEND system are positioned as a way of catalysing wider changes to “cultures, attitudes and environments”. This vision, the plan claims, “aligns with other key reforms underway across government”.

Another objective is to restore trust and confidence in the SEND system.

Inclusive education system

According to research commissioned by the government, strong national leadership on inclusive education policy and coordinating social systems is a key ingredient of successful school inclusion.

However, it feels neither frivolous nor malign to enquire whether the current administration fully believes in or is up to the task of delivering on these pledges, given that: a) the erosion of trust was largely a result of its previous attempt to overhaul the SEND system; and b) its deportment on other matters seems inconsistent with greater inclusion and social cohesion.

So, with a change of government the most probable outcome of the next election, what does all this mean for a Labour Party yet to reveal its proposals for SEND and inclusion? Here are three considerations.

1. Understand the problem

First, accept the inheritance of the ongoing SEND/AP Change Programme. Incorporate the learning into an updated plan committing to taking some giant steps towards making schools more inclusive.

This could include a serious and sustained investment in SEND provisions within mainstream schools to take the pressure off specialist settings and an investigation into the impact of these bases on facilitating pupils’ inclusion in mainstream lessons.

2. Take your time

Secondly, don’t rush. Yes, the SEND crisis is real and urgent but sustainable solutions - the kind encoded in the Salamanca Statement that can lead to irreversible and authentic inclusion - require our best deliberative thinking.

This work could also incorporate Labour’s already-stated interest in widening participation in the policy process by using citizens’ assembly to focus on work around inclusion or education more broadly, as the government of Ireland has committed to doing.

3. Be holistic

Thirdly, in adopting the aim of creating a more inclusive society, Labour needs to present itself as a credible sales and delivery team. It’s said that school leaders make the weather. Well, Labour needs to manage the climate.

Its SEND policy must be seen to be part of a wider and coherent policy slate that reflects inclusive values. Labour can’t afford to undermine the trust it’s asking for from families, educators and others by taking positions in other policy areas that appear indifferent to, or worse, hostile to social inclusion.

The Salamanca Statement remains the highest-profile international accord on inclusive education. As it approaches its thirtieth anniversary, we’re reminded that inclusion is a long game.

A change of government need not signal a return to square one, but meaningful progress is only possible when the intentions of policymakers, policies and the environment in which everything functions are in clear alignment.

Rob Webster is a researcher specialising in SEND and inclusion. His book, The Inclusion Illusion, is free to download via UCL Press