Lords Chamber
Wednesday 10th September 2025
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:07
Legislation: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – committee stage (day 10) - part one
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The The children's The children's well-being The children's well-being and schools bill.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg to move at the house do now again resolve itself into a committee upon the bill. The question its that the house
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The question its that the house do now resolve itself into a committee upon the bill. The After After close After close 55 After close 55 Amendment After close 55 Amendment 40 After close 55 Amendment 40 6B. After close 55 Amendment 40 6B.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
After close 55 Amendment 40 6B. This is a simple amendment and if
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This is a simple amendment and if I could preface my remarks by saying that, obviously, it is really important that a child is in school as often as possible because when
Legislation: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – committee stage (day 10) - part one
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The The children's The children's well-being The children's well-being and schools bill.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg to move at the house do now again resolve itself into a committee upon the bill. The question its that the house
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The question its that the house do now resolve itself into a committee upon the bill. The After After close After close 55 After close 55 Amendment After close 55 Amendment 40 After close 55 Amendment 40 6B. After close 55 Amendment 40 6B.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
After close 55 Amendment 40 6B. This is a simple amendment and if
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This is a simple amendment and if I could preface my remarks by saying that, obviously, it is really important that a child is in school as often as possible because when
11:08
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
as often as possible because when they are not in school, they are not learning. But equally it has as important that they have quality time with their parents. The opportunity to be with both parents is hugely important and they learn so much from that opportunity. I was conscious as a very young teacher in Prescott that the three large faces of work had a closure where the whole factory closed down for a period of time so that the factory workers could have a holiday.
It often didn't coincide with the school holidays, and as a school, we were relaxed about that because we felt important that children should be with parents. That practice is very limiting now. There are not many factories nationwide. There are some in the North whether factory does close down for a set period and I just hope that the amendment is quite clear that we take licence of that fact in terms of attendance issues. In terms of amendment 449, it speaks for itself that all the information that is available is complete and accurate and consistent, and that information should always be available in terms of attendance to parents.
I move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed after clause 35, insert the new clause as printed in the Marshall list.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
in the Marshall list. It is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord story and give a nod to his amendment. I rise to speak to my amendment 499 in this group. The purpose of which is incredibly clear, and that is this. Every child
It often didn't coincide with the school holidays, and as a school, we were relaxed about that because we felt important that children should be with parents. That practice is very limiting now. There are not many factories nationwide. There are some in the North whether factory does close down for a set period and I just hope that the amendment is quite clear that we take licence of that fact in terms of attendance issues. In terms of amendment 449, it speaks for itself that all the information that is available is complete and accurate and consistent, and that information should always be available in terms of attendance to parents.
I move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed after clause 35, insert the new clause as printed in the Marshall list.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
in the Marshall list. It is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord story and give a nod to his amendment. I rise to speak to my amendment 499 in this group. The purpose of which is incredibly clear, and that is this. Every child
11:10
Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative)
clear, and that is this. Every child is entitled to an excellent education. But that doesn't mean that every child should receive the same education, the same provision. The great joy of being born human is that we are born with bright, beautiful diversity from entering this human world. The problem with the bell is currently set out is that it doesn't fully appreciate this fact. All the difficulties that parents have in achieving that excellent provision for their children.
It makes sense that it is a criticism for anybody in the system. Teachers do tremendous work day in, day out, often in the most pressing and most difficult of circumstances. What this amendment is all about is to recognise the particularity of individual provision, not least for those children and young people who may be disabled or have special educational needs. The difficulty for parents in the process of trying to get DHCP. The cost often involved making it prohibitive, even if parents can go through that time-consuming and terribly intense process.
What this amendment simply asks is for the Secretary of State to produce an attendance code of practice. In that, to have it focused, support first. To understand the particularities of those circumstances and to not have a presumption that the school is necessarily the best and in some ways the only place for that excellent educational provision. As I say, this amendment speaks to children and young people and parents across the piece, but it is often those children who are disabled, who have special educational needs, and the parents of those children who find themselves at the sharpest and of this current situation.
That is why amendment 499 suggests an attendance code of practice. Support, focused, support first. I look forward to the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Minister's response. I rise in support of amendment
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise in support of amendment 499 tabled by my noble friend which would require the secretary of state to issue attendance code of to issue attendance code of practice. I believe this is a modest practice. I believe this is a modest proposal yet one that could transform how attendance is enforced and supported across England. I want
It makes sense that it is a criticism for anybody in the system. Teachers do tremendous work day in, day out, often in the most pressing and most difficult of circumstances. What this amendment is all about is to recognise the particularity of individual provision, not least for those children and young people who may be disabled or have special educational needs. The difficulty for parents in the process of trying to get DHCP. The cost often involved making it prohibitive, even if parents can go through that time-consuming and terribly intense process.
What this amendment simply asks is for the Secretary of State to produce an attendance code of practice. In that, to have it focused, support first. To understand the particularities of those circumstances and to not have a presumption that the school is necessarily the best and in some ways the only place for that excellent educational provision. As I say, this amendment speaks to children and young people and parents across the piece, but it is often those children who are disabled, who have special educational needs, and the parents of those children who find themselves at the sharpest and of this current situation.
That is why amendment 499 suggests an attendance code of practice. Support, focused, support first. I look forward to the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Minister's response. I rise in support of amendment
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise in support of amendment 499 tabled by my noble friend which would require the secretary of state to issue attendance code of to issue attendance code of practice. I believe this is a modest practice. I believe this is a modest proposal yet one that could transform how attendance is enforced and supported across England. I want
11:13
Lord Wei (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Wei (Conservative)
and supported across England. I want to 1st thank my noble friend Lord Lucas for stepping in for me last week when I was unable to be here in terms of my own absence. It was for a family wedding though it didn't pass comment on their own attendance record that day. In fact, when the Whip discovered a wedding was due to take place and I was sent to attend, business seemed to be swiftly rescheduled for Monday and Tuesday. In any case, I was unable to attend but I am grateful both to colleagues and staff of the house for their patience with me.
Many of my amendments have been submitted, some received with humour, some less so, but they all made the same point, that there is concern about the overreach of this bill and the heavy burden it will place on families, and already overstretched staff and systems. Talking about attendance, at present, practice across the country is wildly inconsistent. One parent reported that, in the local authority, they had a 75% chance being issued of a notice being satisfied. That authority issued 270 notices in a single year to just 320 home educated children.
In other areas, parents faced nothing like this. This doesn't seem like safeguarding to me but a postcode lottery and is indefensible. The current approach often defaults to enforcement and sanctions rather than genuinely seeking to understand and address the why of an attendance. Just over the summer, it was reported by Hampshire County Council that £1.6 million in revenue by finding families in the last few An increase of 22% from previous years. This can exacerbate stress experienced by families and failed to secure a child's education.
This amendment does not prevent enforcement, rather it sets clear parameters. We already have statutory codes and are working together. This thing -- frameworks bring clarity consistently. Why do we not have this for schools? Without a child, families are left in the dark well authorities very well the approach. Some parents describe the stress of being taken to court again and again. Some describe the threat of prison which does nothing to help the child. This is not proportionate enforcement, it is a system failure.
The contrast, were authorities have taken supportive approaches, outcomes improved. Parents felt listened to come a trusted and respected. Another family was given space when their child could not face a visit, and yet later the child chose to engage and proudly share her work. The child is now thriving at university for that's what good practice looks like. Partnership punishment. We mustn't forget those children for whom mainstream schooling has become unsafe or unbearable. Parents withdraw children because their mental health was deteriorating, sometimes dangerously so.
When child was self harming and recovered within a couple of months of home education. It is a rigid system that treats them as statistics to be reinforced against. This amendment would standardise enforcement so families are not punished for their postcode. It would prioritise support before coercion and give clarity to families and local authorities protecting the vulnerable, helping those officers who genuinely want to act fairly and provide guidance. It would restore it to legitimacy -- it would restore legitimacy interested public systems.
This is a long
**** Possible New Speaker ****
overdue measure. I commend it to the As the house will now, school attendance every day is absolutely attendance every day is absolutely critical for the success of pupils and during the pandemic, the and during the pandemic, the previous government introduced the collection of attendance data and
Many of my amendments have been submitted, some received with humour, some less so, but they all made the same point, that there is concern about the overreach of this bill and the heavy burden it will place on families, and already overstretched staff and systems. Talking about attendance, at present, practice across the country is wildly inconsistent. One parent reported that, in the local authority, they had a 75% chance being issued of a notice being satisfied. That authority issued 270 notices in a single year to just 320 home educated children.
In other areas, parents faced nothing like this. This doesn't seem like safeguarding to me but a postcode lottery and is indefensible. The current approach often defaults to enforcement and sanctions rather than genuinely seeking to understand and address the why of an attendance. Just over the summer, it was reported by Hampshire County Council that £1.6 million in revenue by finding families in the last few An increase of 22% from previous years. This can exacerbate stress experienced by families and failed to secure a child's education.
This amendment does not prevent enforcement, rather it sets clear parameters. We already have statutory codes and are working together. This thing -- frameworks bring clarity consistently. Why do we not have this for schools? Without a child, families are left in the dark well authorities very well the approach. Some parents describe the stress of being taken to court again and again. Some describe the threat of prison which does nothing to help the child. This is not proportionate enforcement, it is a system failure.
The contrast, were authorities have taken supportive approaches, outcomes improved. Parents felt listened to come a trusted and respected. Another family was given space when their child could not face a visit, and yet later the child chose to engage and proudly share her work. The child is now thriving at university for that's what good practice looks like. Partnership punishment. We mustn't forget those children for whom mainstream schooling has become unsafe or unbearable. Parents withdraw children because their mental health was deteriorating, sometimes dangerously so.
When child was self harming and recovered within a couple of months of home education. It is a rigid system that treats them as statistics to be reinforced against. This amendment would standardise enforcement so families are not punished for their postcode. It would prioritise support before coercion and give clarity to families and local authorities protecting the vulnerable, helping those officers who genuinely want to act fairly and provide guidance. It would restore it to legitimacy -- it would restore legitimacy interested public systems.
This is a long
**** Possible New Speaker ****
overdue measure. I commend it to the As the house will now, school attendance every day is absolutely attendance every day is absolutely critical for the success of pupils and during the pandemic, the and during the pandemic, the previous government introduced the collection of attendance data and
11:18
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
collection of attendance data and people level twice a day. Initially on a voluntary basis for all schools in England and now on a mandatory basis. We have among the best attendance data in the world, which allows every school in the country to understand the patterns of their attendance of absent, both looking at their own people cohort but also compared to other schools in their local authority. And I would like to thank the government for continuing the work we started in this area and particularly commend the officials who are responsible for producing such accessible and practical help to schools.
So I would argue that the system built in the Department of education and being used more by schools means they can already analyse the impact not just of the factory shutdown on attendance but perhaps more relevant today on a potential tube strike, but whether or many other factors pretty much in real time. -- weather. I'm not sure if this amendment is needed although I'm sure that Lord Storey was suggesting more flexibility in relation to school attendance.
I have to say I cannot agree with the noble Lord and I think the evidence that the department has produced in terms of the impact of missing even small amounts of time results at GCSE, for example, I really clear, and we need to respect that evidence. I'm grateful to my noble friend Lord Holmes for setting out the purpose of his amendments -- amendment. You will forgive me if I didn't quite understand it in the way he presented it.
My understanding - the noble Lady the Minister will confirm - is that this is accommodated within the schools. I have sadly visited schools where children are able to take time out of the classroom and particularly those with a plan will often have the details of the flexibility set out. More broadly, there is extensive guidance and practical extensive guidance and practical health -- help to local authorities and all the other groups referred to in this amendment.
I would say the department has been particularly proactive in this area and encouraged those schools were succeeding in turning the tide on attendance to share their insights with those who are struggling and very often it is about those positive actions that they take, putting on more after-school clubs, for example, calling parents when a child has had a particularly good series of days of attendance with a message of congratulations I absolutely understand where my noble friend is coming from but I don't think the amendment is needed.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This government is determined to break down barriers by supporting break down barriers by supporting every child to thrive at school. The Noble Baronesses right that even Noble Baronesses right that even small bits of absence, particularly when added up over a child because my career can disproportionately impact on that child's achievement
So I would argue that the system built in the Department of education and being used more by schools means they can already analyse the impact not just of the factory shutdown on attendance but perhaps more relevant today on a potential tube strike, but whether or many other factors pretty much in real time. -- weather. I'm not sure if this amendment is needed although I'm sure that Lord Storey was suggesting more flexibility in relation to school attendance.
I have to say I cannot agree with the noble Lord and I think the evidence that the department has produced in terms of the impact of missing even small amounts of time results at GCSE, for example, I really clear, and we need to respect that evidence. I'm grateful to my noble friend Lord Holmes for setting out the purpose of his amendments -- amendment. You will forgive me if I didn't quite understand it in the way he presented it.
My understanding - the noble Lady the Minister will confirm - is that this is accommodated within the schools. I have sadly visited schools where children are able to take time out of the classroom and particularly those with a plan will often have the details of the flexibility set out. More broadly, there is extensive guidance and practical extensive guidance and practical health -- help to local authorities and all the other groups referred to in this amendment.
I would say the department has been particularly proactive in this area and encouraged those schools were succeeding in turning the tide on attendance to share their insights with those who are struggling and very often it is about those positive actions that they take, putting on more after-school clubs, for example, calling parents when a child has had a particularly good series of days of attendance with a message of congratulations I absolutely understand where my noble friend is coming from but I don't think the amendment is needed.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This government is determined to break down barriers by supporting break down barriers by supporting every child to thrive at school. The Noble Baronesses right that even Noble Baronesses right that even small bits of absence, particularly when added up over a child because my career can disproportionately impact on that child's achievement
11:22
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
impact on that child's achievement and, of course, create disruption in the classroom as well for other pupils. And that is why I am very pleased that thanks to the efforts of the sector, absence is moving in the right direction, with children attending over 3.1 million more days this year compared to last and over 100,000 fewer children persistently absent. This does still leave around one in five people's missing around 10% or more of school. Which is why the Noble Baronesses says there has been substantial work on this.
Including by the previous government, including herself to develop data and monitoring of progress. In addition, the department has developed an attendance toolkit, alongside the data tools, to support schools in identifying the drivers of absence and adopt effective practice when it comes to children, including the most vulnerable. Schools are supporting other schools. We have had events attended by around 3000 L from secondary schools from schools and local authorities to help to drive that change -- 3000 L -- leaders.
We do acknowledge that school attendance rates in particular locations can be influenced by a variety of external factors. However, schools and local authorities are best placed to identify those areas and specific issues and take steps to mitigate them. In general, the school year is structured in such a way as to provide plenty of time for holidays and family time outside of term time. But schools and local authorities also already have considerable flexibility between them to plan term dates and can also hold days at times of year when art suited which are suited to the needs of specific families -- times of year which are suited to families in specific areas.
I do accept the point made by the noble Lord story point made by the noble Lord story -- Lord Storey about tracker sizing -- the need to recognise the needs of different children. But also his call for there to be a standardised approach that sets out the requirements and the roles of those outlined in the amendment. I can say that there is already statutory guidance which sets out in detail those rules and responsibilities -- roles.
In fact, for all the institutions listed in the amendment, in order to improve attendance. This was updated in 2022 and in August 2024. The guidance takes a support-first approach to improve school attendance and is now widely known by the sector following extensive work by the Department to promote and embed its contents and to share best practice from around the country. And it will be updated as needed in the future. Introducing a separate code of practice is proposed -- as proposed by this amendment would duplicate this statutory guidance and I think risks confusion.
I think for the reasons I've outlined, noble Lords will be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
able to withdraw their amendments. And begging to withdraw my amendment. Is it your Lordships pleasure
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Is it your Lordships pleasure that the amendment be by leave withdrawn? The amendment is by leave withdrawn? The amendment is by leave withdrawn. We now come to the next withdrawn. We now come to the next group, after close 35, Lord Wei.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
group, after close 35, Lord Wei. I rise to support amendments in my name. These are modest and aim to address the way that the system
Including by the previous government, including herself to develop data and monitoring of progress. In addition, the department has developed an attendance toolkit, alongside the data tools, to support schools in identifying the drivers of absence and adopt effective practice when it comes to children, including the most vulnerable. Schools are supporting other schools. We have had events attended by around 3000 L from secondary schools from schools and local authorities to help to drive that change -- 3000 L -- leaders.
We do acknowledge that school attendance rates in particular locations can be influenced by a variety of external factors. However, schools and local authorities are best placed to identify those areas and specific issues and take steps to mitigate them. In general, the school year is structured in such a way as to provide plenty of time for holidays and family time outside of term time. But schools and local authorities also already have considerable flexibility between them to plan term dates and can also hold days at times of year when art suited which are suited to the needs of specific families -- times of year which are suited to families in specific areas.
I do accept the point made by the noble Lord story point made by the noble Lord story -- Lord Storey about tracker sizing -- the need to recognise the needs of different children. But also his call for there to be a standardised approach that sets out the requirements and the roles of those outlined in the amendment. I can say that there is already statutory guidance which sets out in detail those rules and responsibilities -- roles.
In fact, for all the institutions listed in the amendment, in order to improve attendance. This was updated in 2022 and in August 2024. The guidance takes a support-first approach to improve school attendance and is now widely known by the sector following extensive work by the Department to promote and embed its contents and to share best practice from around the country. And it will be updated as needed in the future. Introducing a separate code of practice is proposed -- as proposed by this amendment would duplicate this statutory guidance and I think risks confusion.
I think for the reasons I've outlined, noble Lords will be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
able to withdraw their amendments. And begging to withdraw my amendment. Is it your Lordships pleasure
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Is it your Lordships pleasure that the amendment be by leave withdrawn? The amendment is by leave withdrawn? The amendment is by leave withdrawn. We now come to the next withdrawn. We now come to the next group, after close 35, Lord Wei.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
group, after close 35, Lord Wei. I rise to support amendments in my name. These are modest and aim to address the way that the system
11:27
Lord Wei (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Wei (Conservative)
deals with families. Sharing of best practice across local authorities and safeguarding of children from farm -- from harm that may arise. farm -- from harm that may arise. Let me first turn to amendment 46 -- 426D. One is the total of home educators in the area and the number of complaints received. Were these figures so important? They shed a light on how local authorities are engaging with families. They show how relationships are constructive. This amendment goes further.
Introduces -- it introduces a mechanism. Specifically those in the top 10% were complaints are relatively low to the number of families who receive funding and support to show the best practice with the authorities that find themselves in the bottom 10%. It's not about penalising weaker authorities. It's about improving system of engagement and building trusting relationships with trusting relationships with educators. While I may have focused in problems that arise when local authorities overreach, it is important to recognise there are many examples of constructive engagement which deserve to be commended.
Parents have spoken warmly of meetings were they felt the value or a child enjoyed showing his work, turning what might have been a stressful encounter into a positive one. Authorities such as Salford have invested in training staff to understand diverse approaches from structure to child- led learning. Families in Cambridge have noted that there efforts to educate officials about methods have been affected. Meetings have been piloted to support families considering elective home education, fostering collaboration. There are also parental advisory boards were family and officials meet in a supportive environment with the aim of providing access to resources.
Families respond positively in children thrive in these situations. And review, this is a light touch with constructive intervention that respects both the duties of local authorities and the rights of parents. It recognises that challenges of medication are best addressed not by top-down prescription but by care and good This amendment is motivated by an important principle that the welfare and education of the child must always come first. It makes clear that no parent should be subject to criminal prosecution, penalty or sanctions under the provisions of this bill if such legal action would cause harm to the child's welfare or cause greater harm to the education if the action were not taken.
This amendment is carefully drafted in section 1 of the children's act 1989. The bedrock of our child protection framework. It ties the understanding of education to both section 9 which requires parental wishes and article 2 of protocol 1 of the European of human rights which guarantees the right to education. It is not about creating a loophole but ensuring that the pursuit of enforcement does not in itself become a source of harm. We all know in the complex and varied circumstances of home education legal action can sometimes have unintended consequences.
It may disrupt the child's learning and undermine family stability, in some cases drive children into situations of greater vulnerability. We can't ignore the mounting evidence that forcing children back into unsuitable school environments or, lysing their parents for seeking alternatives, it too often inflict harm. Families have spoken of children spiralling into mental health crises at the age of six, of trauma so severe it triggered seizures and panic attacks or suicidal thoughts, of Sunday evenings filled with dread, stomach pains and tears. Research shows that never divergent children, particularly those with autism up this proportionately affected.
Parents describe the cruelty of being told they must either force their child into an environment that is destroying them or face fines, prosecutions or even imprisonment themselves. These plant instance create not only stress and poverty for families torso stigma, fear and breakdown of trust between authorities and parents. With testimony of children kicking and screaming to classrooms, restrained at school entrances, bullied and subject to neglect so great for further may die. Such stories make it clear that punitive enforcement does not safeguard but compounds trauma, disrupt education and fractious families.
The governments justice data for fines issued in court says they have doubled since 27 from 12,609 to 25,050 in 2025. Court fines often go unpaid. The total amount is 4.4 billion. This includes confiscation orders such as assets from Serious Crime Act. The outstanding amount owned for the court cost is huge. Research carried out demonstrates the most court fines are not paid. This indicates prosecuting parents is not a good outcome for the justice system either. They spend time enforcing fines for not being paid.
Court fines are disproportionately impacted and people living in poverty with research finding that increasing debt and impacting health. This is not mean that authorities cannot convene. It allows for civil measures or intervention where welfare is at risk and was an important line the such interventions must not affect education. I would suggest that is not merely a safeguard to families to safeguard the integrity of the state itself. Public authorities act in ways that inadvertently cause harm, trust is lost.
Without trust, the effectiveness is lost. These amendments embody a balanced approach. Amendment 46 are Sass to learn from those authorities who have built relationships with families. 46 he asks us to ensure that in our zeal to regulate, we do not inflict great harm on the children we seek to protect. In an area where parental choice and diversity of provision is vital, we can't afford a heavy-handed approach that alienates families and risks undermining children's welfare. If we are serious about the best interests of children and we believe in the rights of parents, then I urge the government to give these amendments serious consideration.
They represent a considerate step forward with the principal that no child should be harmed in the name
**** Possible New Speaker ****
of regulation. I beg to move. Amendment proposed, insert the following new clause and the words
**** Possible New Speaker ****
as printed in the Marshall list. I would like to support the thrust of both my noble friends thrust of both my noble friends amendments. The Department for education has a really important education has a really important role to play in helping local authorities drive up the quality of authorities drive up the quality of the standard, the quality of their relationships and service for the home educating community. The home educating community. The leadership that the partnership can provide, the feeling that local
Introduces -- it introduces a mechanism. Specifically those in the top 10% were complaints are relatively low to the number of families who receive funding and support to show the best practice with the authorities that find themselves in the bottom 10%. It's not about penalising weaker authorities. It's about improving system of engagement and building trusting relationships with trusting relationships with educators. While I may have focused in problems that arise when local authorities overreach, it is important to recognise there are many examples of constructive engagement which deserve to be commended.
Parents have spoken warmly of meetings were they felt the value or a child enjoyed showing his work, turning what might have been a stressful encounter into a positive one. Authorities such as Salford have invested in training staff to understand diverse approaches from structure to child- led learning. Families in Cambridge have noted that there efforts to educate officials about methods have been affected. Meetings have been piloted to support families considering elective home education, fostering collaboration. There are also parental advisory boards were family and officials meet in a supportive environment with the aim of providing access to resources.
Families respond positively in children thrive in these situations. And review, this is a light touch with constructive intervention that respects both the duties of local authorities and the rights of parents. It recognises that challenges of medication are best addressed not by top-down prescription but by care and good This amendment is motivated by an important principle that the welfare and education of the child must always come first. It makes clear that no parent should be subject to criminal prosecution, penalty or sanctions under the provisions of this bill if such legal action would cause harm to the child's welfare or cause greater harm to the education if the action were not taken.
This amendment is carefully drafted in section 1 of the children's act 1989. The bedrock of our child protection framework. It ties the understanding of education to both section 9 which requires parental wishes and article 2 of protocol 1 of the European of human rights which guarantees the right to education. It is not about creating a loophole but ensuring that the pursuit of enforcement does not in itself become a source of harm. We all know in the complex and varied circumstances of home education legal action can sometimes have unintended consequences.
It may disrupt the child's learning and undermine family stability, in some cases drive children into situations of greater vulnerability. We can't ignore the mounting evidence that forcing children back into unsuitable school environments or, lysing their parents for seeking alternatives, it too often inflict harm. Families have spoken of children spiralling into mental health crises at the age of six, of trauma so severe it triggered seizures and panic attacks or suicidal thoughts, of Sunday evenings filled with dread, stomach pains and tears. Research shows that never divergent children, particularly those with autism up this proportionately affected.
Parents describe the cruelty of being told they must either force their child into an environment that is destroying them or face fines, prosecutions or even imprisonment themselves. These plant instance create not only stress and poverty for families torso stigma, fear and breakdown of trust between authorities and parents. With testimony of children kicking and screaming to classrooms, restrained at school entrances, bullied and subject to neglect so great for further may die. Such stories make it clear that punitive enforcement does not safeguard but compounds trauma, disrupt education and fractious families.
The governments justice data for fines issued in court says they have doubled since 27 from 12,609 to 25,050 in 2025. Court fines often go unpaid. The total amount is 4.4 billion. This includes confiscation orders such as assets from Serious Crime Act. The outstanding amount owned for the court cost is huge. Research carried out demonstrates the most court fines are not paid. This indicates prosecuting parents is not a good outcome for the justice system either. They spend time enforcing fines for not being paid.
Court fines are disproportionately impacted and people living in poverty with research finding that increasing debt and impacting health. This is not mean that authorities cannot convene. It allows for civil measures or intervention where welfare is at risk and was an important line the such interventions must not affect education. I would suggest that is not merely a safeguard to families to safeguard the integrity of the state itself. Public authorities act in ways that inadvertently cause harm, trust is lost.
Without trust, the effectiveness is lost. These amendments embody a balanced approach. Amendment 46 are Sass to learn from those authorities who have built relationships with families. 46 he asks us to ensure that in our zeal to regulate, we do not inflict great harm on the children we seek to protect. In an area where parental choice and diversity of provision is vital, we can't afford a heavy-handed approach that alienates families and risks undermining children's welfare. If we are serious about the best interests of children and we believe in the rights of parents, then I urge the government to give these amendments serious consideration.
They represent a considerate step forward with the principal that no child should be harmed in the name
**** Possible New Speaker ****
of regulation. I beg to move. Amendment proposed, insert the following new clause and the words
**** Possible New Speaker ****
as printed in the Marshall list. I would like to support the thrust of both my noble friends thrust of both my noble friends amendments. The Department for education has a really important education has a really important role to play in helping local authorities drive up the quality of authorities drive up the quality of the standard, the quality of their relationships and service for the home educating community. The home educating community. The leadership that the partnership can provide, the feeling that local
11:36
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
provide, the feeling that local authorities can have, that they understand that what they are doing is something which is in the direction the government wishes to take. That needs to be transmitted, and doing it in a way which celebrates the achievements of local authorities which draws out what is happening and makes a good example of that is motivating and constructive way to do this, and I very much hope that the government will take this direction on. Local authority home educating departments tends to be small, to be a bit isolated, to be stuck sometimes at the back-end of safeguarding and subject to pressures that come from subject to pressures that come from that activity.
The department has a really important role to play in helping get things right. My noble friends second amendment as the government will know from my previous corrections that I support, we should be looking at the child first and punishing the parent second. I listen to the Secretary of State speech at the launch of the recent Children's Commissioner's report, and that was very much the spirit that I heard then. I hope it will be reflected in the government's answer today.
The department has a really important role to play in helping get things right. My noble friends second amendment as the government will know from my previous corrections that I support, we should be looking at the child first and punishing the parent second. I listen to the Secretary of State speech at the launch of the recent Children's Commissioner's report, and that was very much the spirit that I heard then. I hope it will be reflected in the government's answer today.
11:37
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
If I could make some remarks on Amendment 40 6D, Lord Lucas is right that it is important that good practice is shared between home educators and local authorities. It is important that the quality of home education is at the best it can possibly be, and we have a huge role to play in ensuring that happens. We already know that many noble Lords have given mention two particular local authorities, and the sterling work they have done with home educators.
I have a slight problem with the idea of the Secretary of State doing annual support. To me, given the distance of other amendments which are decrying the fact that more information is required, to put this report together which require doing that, asking for that form filling and more information to come to the centre. I think there might be good practice where local authorities might wish to do annual reports, and they might want to do a report on the work that is going on with home educators that could be shared with other home educators, but to put it in a formal way, I think it is bureaucracy gone mad.
On the second bureaucracy gone mad. On the second amendment, I am surprised at this amendment in the sense that schools are incredibly sensitive to the needs of children, particularly as has been mentioned, those with neuro diverse issues, autism. They pull out all the stops to support those children, and I just think this amendment might create problems for the attendance policies of local authorities, attendance policies which have been developed by previous government and this government, so I think we should recognise the current work that goes on, and despite concerns, I can tell you that in dealings I have had with the schools, with Head Teachers, with teachers, they are more than sensitive to the needs of those children and their pupils.
I have a slight problem with the idea of the Secretary of State doing annual support. To me, given the distance of other amendments which are decrying the fact that more information is required, to put this report together which require doing that, asking for that form filling and more information to come to the centre. I think there might be good practice where local authorities might wish to do annual reports, and they might want to do a report on the work that is going on with home educators that could be shared with other home educators, but to put it in a formal way, I think it is bureaucracy gone mad.
On the second bureaucracy gone mad. On the second amendment, I am surprised at this amendment in the sense that schools are incredibly sensitive to the needs of children, particularly as has been mentioned, those with neuro diverse issues, autism. They pull out all the stops to support those children, and I just think this amendment might create problems for the attendance policies of local authorities, attendance policies which have been developed by previous government and this government, so I think we should recognise the current work that goes on, and despite concerns, I can tell you that in dealings I have had with the schools, with Head Teachers, with teachers, they are more than sensitive to the needs of those children and their pupils.
11:40
Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard (Ulster Unionist Party)
-
-
Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard (Ulster Unionist Party)
Very briefly on this, it is mainly a query on 4 to 6 AE, and mainly a query on 4 to 6 AE, and that is around section 2, and I'm just wondering who would make the judgements and who would make the assessments around whether legal action would be required or not. And if it was to harm the child's welfare and greater harm to a child's education. I am just conscious, and I agree with Lord Storey around how schools in my experience have been very good at making assessments and dealing with those young people's difficulties.
The difficulties sometimes is the relationship between the school and the authorities. I find that is most problematic, so I'm not clear on supporting that amendment because of that clause in the sense that I'm not sure who would make that judgement, and who would make that judgement as to whether the child or young person is doing that deliberately or whether it is out of their mental-health state potentially, or some other reason, and I'm just keen to know who would make that judgement.
The difficulties sometimes is the relationship between the school and the authorities. I find that is most problematic, so I'm not clear on supporting that amendment because of that clause in the sense that I'm not sure who would make that judgement, and who would make that judgement as to whether the child or young person is doing that deliberately or whether it is out of their mental-health state potentially, or some other reason, and I'm just keen to know who would make that judgement.
11:42
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
My Lords, I must say, I would like to preface my remarks on these amendments by just saying that I really don't recognise the Dickensian school world that my noble friends describes, and I would encourage him to visit any of the schools that I visited led by Lord Nash, Lord Agnew, Lord Knight, Lord Hampton, and in case anyone is thinking that I only think about academies, my school of joy, Stanley Road primary in Oldham, where children are just bursting with pride at what they achieve in a clearly very deprived community, so I would just like to acknowledge and thank all of those who are involved across our schools in delivering education and joy to our children.
Turning to my noble friends, first Amendment 40 6D which seeks to create a mechanism for sharing best practice between local authorities regarding home education. Of course the principle of sharing best practice is an excellent one, but I do agree with the noble Lord Lord Storey when he says he thinks it is perhaps disproportionate for the Secretary of State to be requiring this report, and I would say that there is obviously nothing preventing local authorities trying to learn from one another already, and of course, local conditions vary very considerably, for example, in terms of the availability of special schools between local authorities, so I think the conclusions that could be drawn from the data that my noble friends suggests should be analysed and could be misleading.
And I also agree but the noble Lord Lord Storey in relation to 4 to 6 AE and the care that schools take to support children. I think there is a wider point, which is that I think you could argue that a lot of particularly criminal prosecutions of the child's parents could result in harm to the child, particularly if the child's principal carer is sent to prison, but that is something which the courts already consider, but I think my noble friends amendment would cut across many other areas of legislation, and some of the principles that underpin our criminal justice system in a way that just is not realistic.
But I am hoping the noble Baroness the Minister will be able to clarify both of these points when she comments.
Turning to my noble friends, first Amendment 40 6D which seeks to create a mechanism for sharing best practice between local authorities regarding home education. Of course the principle of sharing best practice is an excellent one, but I do agree with the noble Lord Lord Storey when he says he thinks it is perhaps disproportionate for the Secretary of State to be requiring this report, and I would say that there is obviously nothing preventing local authorities trying to learn from one another already, and of course, local conditions vary very considerably, for example, in terms of the availability of special schools between local authorities, so I think the conclusions that could be drawn from the data that my noble friends suggests should be analysed and could be misleading.
And I also agree but the noble Lord Lord Storey in relation to 4 to 6 AE and the care that schools take to support children. I think there is a wider point, which is that I think you could argue that a lot of particularly criminal prosecutions of the child's parents could result in harm to the child, particularly if the child's principal carer is sent to prison, but that is something which the courts already consider, but I think my noble friends amendment would cut across many other areas of legislation, and some of the principles that underpin our criminal justice system in a way that just is not realistic.
But I am hoping the noble Baroness the Minister will be able to clarify both of these points when she comments.
11:45
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
And I just by strongly associating myself with the comments of the noble Lady about the excellent work happening in schools around the country and the enormous pride, enjoyment and achievement that children experience in those that children experience in those I would, however, add that in the last weeks, the government was clear that there is a right to educate your children at home for parents in this country. In fact, as we have discussed, probably one of the most permissive regimes of any country to allow you to educate your child at allow you to educate your child at home.
With children not at school registers are about is ensuring that education is suitable and that children do not fall through gaps by virtue of claiming a suitable home education when that isn't what is being delivered. And I also say to the noble Lord that I have written to him, as I said I would do last week, on the detail of very many of his amendments and that letter either is or will be available in the library for other noble Lords to look at as well.
Speaking specifically on route to the amendments. This amendment seeks to introduce duty on local authorities to document the number of complaints and the Secretary of State would then be obliged to analyse that situation and provide resources. That assessment would be made based on the rate of complaints and the number of orders issues as a percentage of the overall cohort. The Department already runs a mandatory collection of data from local authorities concerning their home educated cohorts.
This collection includes the sides of romanticise of each cohort and -- the size of each cohort. That's why the bill contains measures that could be used to oblige local authorities to provide data returns to the Secretary of State. As we also discussed last week, we will consider how best to facilitate the sharing of best practice across local authorities from a central position using the data that the department will hold for early implementation of the children not in school register.
We talked about where there is good practice in local authorities and how we can share that and also the action taken already by the Department were local authorities action is disproportionate or not best for the trusting relationship that noble Lords are looking to regain today. In relation to the rewards and penalties implied in the noble Lord's amendment, we don't accept the obligation that higher numbers of school attendance orders issued are an automatic indicator of poor performance.
Local authorities must issue small attendance orders if a child is not in receipt of suitable education and it is expedient that the child attends school. It's a local authority areas, there may simply be more children in need of intervention. The noble Lords suggested India -- idea might dissuade them to issue orders in those circumstances. Amendment 426E limits as well. We believe that the law as it stands provides protection to the child and the child's parents and that this amendment is therefore unnecessary.
Children have a right to an education as set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. That education must be suitable and safe. Parents preferences should be secured must always be considered by the local authority. The statutory guidance working together to safeguard children already requires local authority decisions to be made in the best interests of the child and offers clear guidance on how that principle should be upheld. School attendance order process is only commenced with the issuing of a preliminary notice when it does not appear to a local authority that a child is receiving a suitable education or where there is serious safeguarding concerns and it appears to the local authority that it would be in the child's best interest to attend school.
The measures and the bill will help ensure that children not in school receive a safe and suitable education suffer example, registers identify children who would otherwise fall through the gaps and a more efficient school attendance process will be used where children are not receiving a suitable save education to probably receive one. The amendment proposes not to preclude local authorities from taking other actions rather than pursuing legal actions. Of course, it is absolutely right that legal authorities should take a supportive role and to provide advice and guidance to parents.
However, in some cases, such actions will not be affected in securing a child's action and the option must be open to local authorities to have that child registered at a school even as a final measure. Without that option, a child could be left in a situation where they are not receiving a suitable education for an extended deal of time and that would certainly not be in their best interests. I hope therefore that the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
noble Lord will be able to withdraw his amendments. I'm grateful to the Minister for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm grateful to the Minister for her response and look forward to her response and look forward to this letter and also grateful to Parliament for the correspondence that I and now appears have that I and now appears have received. Just wanted to reflect on received. Just wanted to reflect on some of the contributions that were made. First of all, to just clarify
With children not at school registers are about is ensuring that education is suitable and that children do not fall through gaps by virtue of claiming a suitable home education when that isn't what is being delivered. And I also say to the noble Lord that I have written to him, as I said I would do last week, on the detail of very many of his amendments and that letter either is or will be available in the library for other noble Lords to look at as well.
Speaking specifically on route to the amendments. This amendment seeks to introduce duty on local authorities to document the number of complaints and the Secretary of State would then be obliged to analyse that situation and provide resources. That assessment would be made based on the rate of complaints and the number of orders issues as a percentage of the overall cohort. The Department already runs a mandatory collection of data from local authorities concerning their home educated cohorts.
This collection includes the sides of romanticise of each cohort and -- the size of each cohort. That's why the bill contains measures that could be used to oblige local authorities to provide data returns to the Secretary of State. As we also discussed last week, we will consider how best to facilitate the sharing of best practice across local authorities from a central position using the data that the department will hold for early implementation of the children not in school register.
We talked about where there is good practice in local authorities and how we can share that and also the action taken already by the Department were local authorities action is disproportionate or not best for the trusting relationship that noble Lords are looking to regain today. In relation to the rewards and penalties implied in the noble Lord's amendment, we don't accept the obligation that higher numbers of school attendance orders issued are an automatic indicator of poor performance.
Local authorities must issue small attendance orders if a child is not in receipt of suitable education and it is expedient that the child attends school. It's a local authority areas, there may simply be more children in need of intervention. The noble Lords suggested India -- idea might dissuade them to issue orders in those circumstances. Amendment 426E limits as well. We believe that the law as it stands provides protection to the child and the child's parents and that this amendment is therefore unnecessary.
Children have a right to an education as set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. That education must be suitable and safe. Parents preferences should be secured must always be considered by the local authority. The statutory guidance working together to safeguard children already requires local authority decisions to be made in the best interests of the child and offers clear guidance on how that principle should be upheld. School attendance order process is only commenced with the issuing of a preliminary notice when it does not appear to a local authority that a child is receiving a suitable education or where there is serious safeguarding concerns and it appears to the local authority that it would be in the child's best interest to attend school.
The measures and the bill will help ensure that children not in school receive a safe and suitable education suffer example, registers identify children who would otherwise fall through the gaps and a more efficient school attendance process will be used where children are not receiving a suitable save education to probably receive one. The amendment proposes not to preclude local authorities from taking other actions rather than pursuing legal actions. Of course, it is absolutely right that legal authorities should take a supportive role and to provide advice and guidance to parents.
However, in some cases, such actions will not be affected in securing a child's action and the option must be open to local authorities to have that child registered at a school even as a final measure. Without that option, a child could be left in a situation where they are not receiving a suitable education for an extended deal of time and that would certainly not be in their best interests. I hope therefore that the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
noble Lord will be able to withdraw his amendments. I'm grateful to the Minister for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm grateful to the Minister for her response and look forward to her response and look forward to this letter and also grateful to Parliament for the correspondence that I and now appears have that I and now appears have received. Just wanted to reflect on received. Just wanted to reflect on some of the contributions that were made. First of all, to just clarify
11:52
Lord Wei (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Wei (Conservative)
made. First of all, to just clarify that the request for information from local authorities is asking from local authorities is asking them to provide some of the data that they already have, and even though it might seem a bit bureaucratic, I don't think it actually would require much more than a few minutes probably once a year. This is to be balanced with the tremendous bureaucratic demands that we placed -- will be placed on hundreds of families for all the information pertaining to the education of their child, which will take in many cases many, many hours or weeks even based on testimonials I've received from families.
I don't think it is wrong to ask for datasharing on the local authority's side, given the burden that is to be placed on parents. With regards to my other amendment 426E, we are not talking about mainstream schooling for the majority of pupils in this country. When I talk about some of the distress, the suicides or attempted suicides from children being forced back into school through similar measures, we are talking about extreme cases in this country where it isn't appropriate for the child to be sent to a school.
Perhaps they have been home educated other life. Perhaps the parents have been busy home educating and being repeatedly asked by the local authority for information. Perhaps they have said, "We cannot share any more, we need to educate our child." This is then interpreted as the child not receiving suitable education. At the moment, there is no protection and you can go down the legal process. There is a gap and I would urge the Minister to look at this gap when it's not the school deciding, when it is the local authority deciding, in some cases without much resource or knowing what people experience.
They have to make a very significant decision to take action against that family. All I'm saying is why don't we pay attention to the harm that might cause. Schools are cognisant of this if they are functioning well. I'm not sure in every case every local authority is able to make that decision on their own. By the time you get to the courts and the courts have enforced principles of the European Court and so on. This is going to create uncertainty and stress which will impact on the child's education.
I hope the I'm child's education. I hope the I'm hopeful for the -- I'm hopeful for the Minister's response. For now, I
**** Possible New Speaker ****
beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Is at your Lordships pleasure that the amendment be withdrawn? that the amendment be withdrawn? Amendment 426E, not made. -- Not Amendment 426E, not made. -- Not Amendment 426E, not made. -- Not moved. In clause 36, amendment 427,
I don't think it is wrong to ask for datasharing on the local authority's side, given the burden that is to be placed on parents. With regards to my other amendment 426E, we are not talking about mainstream schooling for the majority of pupils in this country. When I talk about some of the distress, the suicides or attempted suicides from children being forced back into school through similar measures, we are talking about extreme cases in this country where it isn't appropriate for the child to be sent to a school.
Perhaps they have been home educated other life. Perhaps the parents have been busy home educating and being repeatedly asked by the local authority for information. Perhaps they have said, "We cannot share any more, we need to educate our child." This is then interpreted as the child not receiving suitable education. At the moment, there is no protection and you can go down the legal process. There is a gap and I would urge the Minister to look at this gap when it's not the school deciding, when it is the local authority deciding, in some cases without much resource or knowing what people experience.
They have to make a very significant decision to take action against that family. All I'm saying is why don't we pay attention to the harm that might cause. Schools are cognisant of this if they are functioning well. I'm not sure in every case every local authority is able to make that decision on their own. By the time you get to the courts and the courts have enforced principles of the European Court and so on. This is going to create uncertainty and stress which will impact on the child's education.
I hope the I'm child's education. I hope the I'm hopeful for the -- I'm hopeful for the Minister's response. For now, I
**** Possible New Speaker ****
beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Is at your Lordships pleasure that the amendment be withdrawn? that the amendment be withdrawn? Amendment 426E, not made. -- Not Amendment 426E, not made. -- Not Amendment 426E, not made. -- Not moved. In clause 36, amendment 427,
11:56
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
Lord Lucas.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I raised to speak to amendment 427 and other amendments in this group. Amendment 47 enters the group. Amendment 47 enters the practice of local authorities placing children in unregistered placing children in unregistered alternative provision. This should not happen. These children need quality provision almost by definition. That they should be placed in a unregistered provision placed in a unregistered provision by the state seems to be a complete by the state seems to be a complete rejection of duty.
Amendment 427 B suggesting to the Minister that they should tighten up or give themselves additional scope to deal with additional scope to deal with unregistered legal schools, which unregistered legal schools, which unregistered legal schools, which seeks to disguise the issue by placing themselves into different parts. It has been a technical issue there. The government should address this. The other amendments in this this. The other amendments in this group address the challenge that this bill presents to the religious community.
Of Italy, this will apply to other religious communities where they provide education for children. I'm focusing on this community because I have been speaking to them but I have no authority to speak for them or deep knowledge of their life. There are a vulnerable and peaceful community. Contributors to commercial life and common good. Though in many ways, they keep themselves apart. It is part of the British way as I understand it to respect religions. The heredity community -- this community has different approaches to matters.
Such as keeping sexuality as a private matter. In my experience of the way this country is organised and for these offences and do not attempt to eradicate them. We do, though, said entries and we should be confident in doing so. There have been religions where murder and child abuse have been common features and we are quite right to say, "Now, those are off limits, no matter what religious belief." Those boundaries will obviously change over time.
This bill, as it is currently understood, places the Haredi system of yeshivas beyond boundaries. Yeshivas would be outlawed by it. The principal conflict around the requirement that achievers would have to register at schools and thus be bound by the curriculum and moral teachings that we expect of independent schools. This, the community feel, would be fundamentally in conflict with the Torah and make it impossible for them to continue. My interest in moving these amendments is not so much the particular wording of them.
Are very conscious of their imperfection and I really rather prefer the Bishop of Manchester's approach, but I wish to draw out from the Minister her governance -- her government's intentions. Does the government wish to crush Haredi education or does it seek to make an accommodation? If the government wishes to crush, I expect we will hear from the Minister an exploration of the deeper implications of such an approach to other religions and religious organisations. If the bushes for resolution, what is the Minister for? I can see a range of ways in which a resolution might be reached though I have no authority to negotiate.
The Bishop's amendment is negotiate. The Bishop's amendment is The contention of the community is that the children are home educated, and the older male children receive an extensive and intensive religious upbringing. So is the government prepared to live with the idea that religious education outside of school provided to children who attend school or who are home educated is outwith the reach of the independent schools regulation in the bill? If the government wishes to regulate religious education, how does it propose to constrain the content from such education? A requirement that the education is not something that would be reasonable.
The yeshivas would pass that easily, but I would like to see what the government's position is. If the government is prepared to accept that home education provided to her ready child is to be regarded in the full-time education, what criteria would be used in judging that acceptance? The government might expect to see sufficient times set aside in a child's life for the general education that they require to realise their potential as fully functioning members of society outside their ready community if they so wish.
That has always been my understanding of where the current settlement is with religious minorities. Judging the efficiency of that home education and the safeguarding of the children would be the task of the local authority. As it is for other home educators. Given the particular character of life and its consistency, it might well be of help to local authorities if the standard way of assessing home education could be agreed. And that was what I was setting out to do in a clumsy way to which to focus on detail on that.
If that is acceptable, are the other restrictions which the government would like to place on the accommodation? I get the feeling that the concept of the school day is important to the government, the hours between nine and for Monday to Friday, and that the government would accept that each child was not there for more than a limited amount of time. There is nothing set down the bill, and I can quite understand why in the general context of dealing with the schools.
Nonetheless, if activity within the school day is an important thing for the government, the number of hours could surely be made specific in the context of an agreement with the community. Any agreement would have course be open for renegotiation on either side of the experience. It might be hard to get it right first time that I would really like to see this government setting out to say that different though they are, they are different part of British life and we wish to support them, so where does the government stand? I beg to me.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I raised to speak to amendment 427 and other amendments in this group. Amendment 47 enters the group. Amendment 47 enters the practice of local authorities placing children in unregistered placing children in unregistered alternative provision. This should not happen. These children need quality provision almost by definition. That they should be placed in a unregistered provision placed in a unregistered provision by the state seems to be a complete by the state seems to be a complete rejection of duty.
Amendment 427 B suggesting to the Minister that they should tighten up or give themselves additional scope to deal with additional scope to deal with unregistered legal schools, which unregistered legal schools, which unregistered legal schools, which seeks to disguise the issue by placing themselves into different parts. It has been a technical issue there. The government should address this. The other amendments in this this. The other amendments in this group address the challenge that this bill presents to the religious community.
Of Italy, this will apply to other religious communities where they provide education for children. I'm focusing on this community because I have been speaking to them but I have no authority to speak for them or deep knowledge of their life. There are a vulnerable and peaceful community. Contributors to commercial life and common good. Though in many ways, they keep themselves apart. It is part of the British way as I understand it to respect religions. The heredity community -- this community has different approaches to matters.
Such as keeping sexuality as a private matter. In my experience of the way this country is organised and for these offences and do not attempt to eradicate them. We do, though, said entries and we should be confident in doing so. There have been religions where murder and child abuse have been common features and we are quite right to say, "Now, those are off limits, no matter what religious belief." Those boundaries will obviously change over time.
This bill, as it is currently understood, places the Haredi system of yeshivas beyond boundaries. Yeshivas would be outlawed by it. The principal conflict around the requirement that achievers would have to register at schools and thus be bound by the curriculum and moral teachings that we expect of independent schools. This, the community feel, would be fundamentally in conflict with the Torah and make it impossible for them to continue. My interest in moving these amendments is not so much the particular wording of them.
Are very conscious of their imperfection and I really rather prefer the Bishop of Manchester's approach, but I wish to draw out from the Minister her governance -- her government's intentions. Does the government wish to crush Haredi education or does it seek to make an accommodation? If the government wishes to crush, I expect we will hear from the Minister an exploration of the deeper implications of such an approach to other religions and religious organisations. If the bushes for resolution, what is the Minister for? I can see a range of ways in which a resolution might be reached though I have no authority to negotiate.
The Bishop's amendment is negotiate. The Bishop's amendment is The contention of the community is that the children are home educated, and the older male children receive an extensive and intensive religious upbringing. So is the government prepared to live with the idea that religious education outside of school provided to children who attend school or who are home educated is outwith the reach of the independent schools regulation in the bill? If the government wishes to regulate religious education, how does it propose to constrain the content from such education? A requirement that the education is not something that would be reasonable.
The yeshivas would pass that easily, but I would like to see what the government's position is. If the government is prepared to accept that home education provided to her ready child is to be regarded in the full-time education, what criteria would be used in judging that acceptance? The government might expect to see sufficient times set aside in a child's life for the general education that they require to realise their potential as fully functioning members of society outside their ready community if they so wish.
That has always been my understanding of where the current settlement is with religious minorities. Judging the efficiency of that home education and the safeguarding of the children would be the task of the local authority. As it is for other home educators. Given the particular character of life and its consistency, it might well be of help to local authorities if the standard way of assessing home education could be agreed. And that was what I was setting out to do in a clumsy way to which to focus on detail on that.
If that is acceptable, are the other restrictions which the government would like to place on the accommodation? I get the feeling that the concept of the school day is important to the government, the hours between nine and for Monday to Friday, and that the government would accept that each child was not there for more than a limited amount of time. There is nothing set down the bill, and I can quite understand why in the general context of dealing with the schools.
Nonetheless, if activity within the school day is an important thing for the government, the number of hours could surely be made specific in the context of an agreement with the community. Any agreement would have course be open for renegotiation on either side of the experience. It might be hard to get it right first time that I would really like to see this government setting out to say that different though they are, they are different part of British life and we wish to support them, so where does the government stand? I beg to me.
12:05
The Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops)
-
-
The Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops)
Amendment proposed, clause 36 page 79, line 16, at the end, insert the words as printed on the Marshall
**** Possible New Speaker ****
list. It is a pleasure to follow Lord Lucas and to associate myself with Lucas and to associate myself with his remarks. I rise to speak to the amendment 40 7C on behalf of my colleague the noble pallet the colleague the noble pallet the Bishop of Manchester in his name, the amendment stands. He very much the amendment stands. He very much regrets his inability to attend today's committee stage. The Bishop today's committee stage. The Bishop of Manchester is solution is practical to the finely balanced tension between freedom and regulation in education invited by regulation in education invited by religious bodies.
As things stand, the proposed bill would recognise the proposed bill would recognise two types of full-time education. Education would be undertaken in Education would be undertaken in either a school or an independent educational institution. The latter would need to be registered would need to be registered according to the 2008 act, and the requirement to register would apply to education that is more than half to education that is more than half time. I need to include education provided by religious bodies and national mechanisms for oversight is national mechanisms for oversight is well understood by all.
The Church of England has taken enormous strides forward in both safeguarding training and processes. In local parishes that it welcomed, an average of 95,000 children each week. In 2023. We welcome the government's goal to strengthen education oversight across the nation, but in relation to education provided by religious bodies, there are three issues with the bill as it stands. First, as the National Society for education wrote, in its response to government of safeguarding in and out of school settings, compulsory state legislation for religious activity involving children would significantly extend the role of the state and civil society and represent the considerable and major change for the nature of religious freedom.
Freedom of religion and belief is a precious human liberty, and legislators should think very carefully about the unintended consequences, as well as the intended ones before looking at regulations that might inadvertently threaten that freedom and inhibit religious diversity. The possibility of unintended consequences bring me to my second point. There is a risk that imposing bureaucratic burdens on many volunteer run out of school settings would have on and intended chilling effect. Those consequences might easily follow from a new burden to tot up religious educational activities like choir practice fear of exceeding the part-time hours which registration does not require.
This is to say nothing of the practicalities of securing all the identifiable data that keeps details current would impose on the government as well as the religious educational institution. Thirdly, there is a difficult case like yeshivas that don't quite fit any of the categories that the present bill categories that the present bill proposes. No one speaks to make sure the children are being educated both broadly and safely in addition to any religious component of their education.
This brings me to the proposed amendment which offers a proportional route forward by ensuring that the setting limits itself to education and the local authority has been clearly notified that an attendee has suitable out of school education separately and with time set aside to allow children to receive the order education, and the provider of that religious education, demonstrating to the local authority that it provides the required safeguarding measures that provisions of the bill can be met.
I commend the amendment to the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Minister and the house. My Lords, first of all, I would
**** Possible New Speaker ****
My Lords, first of all, I would like to thank the Bishop of like to thank the Bishop of Manchester for this amendment. I really respect his gentleness and really respect his gentleness and his nobility and it is very much
**** Possible New Speaker ****
list. It is a pleasure to follow Lord Lucas and to associate myself with Lucas and to associate myself with his remarks. I rise to speak to the amendment 40 7C on behalf of my colleague the noble pallet the colleague the noble pallet the Bishop of Manchester in his name, the amendment stands. He very much the amendment stands. He very much regrets his inability to attend today's committee stage. The Bishop today's committee stage. The Bishop of Manchester is solution is practical to the finely balanced tension between freedom and regulation in education invited by regulation in education invited by religious bodies.
As things stand, the proposed bill would recognise the proposed bill would recognise two types of full-time education. Education would be undertaken in Education would be undertaken in either a school or an independent educational institution. The latter would need to be registered would need to be registered according to the 2008 act, and the requirement to register would apply to education that is more than half to education that is more than half time. I need to include education provided by religious bodies and national mechanisms for oversight is national mechanisms for oversight is well understood by all.
The Church of England has taken enormous strides forward in both safeguarding training and processes. In local parishes that it welcomed, an average of 95,000 children each week. In 2023. We welcome the government's goal to strengthen education oversight across the nation, but in relation to education provided by religious bodies, there are three issues with the bill as it stands. First, as the National Society for education wrote, in its response to government of safeguarding in and out of school settings, compulsory state legislation for religious activity involving children would significantly extend the role of the state and civil society and represent the considerable and major change for the nature of religious freedom.
Freedom of religion and belief is a precious human liberty, and legislators should think very carefully about the unintended consequences, as well as the intended ones before looking at regulations that might inadvertently threaten that freedom and inhibit religious diversity. The possibility of unintended consequences bring me to my second point. There is a risk that imposing bureaucratic burdens on many volunteer run out of school settings would have on and intended chilling effect. Those consequences might easily follow from a new burden to tot up religious educational activities like choir practice fear of exceeding the part-time hours which registration does not require.
This is to say nothing of the practicalities of securing all the identifiable data that keeps details current would impose on the government as well as the religious educational institution. Thirdly, there is a difficult case like yeshivas that don't quite fit any of the categories that the present bill categories that the present bill proposes. No one speaks to make sure the children are being educated both broadly and safely in addition to any religious component of their education.
This brings me to the proposed amendment which offers a proportional route forward by ensuring that the setting limits itself to education and the local authority has been clearly notified that an attendee has suitable out of school education separately and with time set aside to allow children to receive the order education, and the provider of that religious education, demonstrating to the local authority that it provides the required safeguarding measures that provisions of the bill can be met.
I commend the amendment to the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Minister and the house. My Lords, first of all, I would
**** Possible New Speaker ****
My Lords, first of all, I would like to thank the Bishop of like to thank the Bishop of Manchester for this amendment. I really respect his gentleness and really respect his gentleness and his nobility and it is very much
12:09
Lord Glasman (Labour)
-
-
Lord Glasman (Labour)
his nobility and it is very much appreciated. I would like to begin with a couple of remarks is a very rarely speak in the house. When I got here, I was given very sage advice that the more you speak, the less people listen. So I do beg the attention of house in this case. This is a matter of great importance to me. And the third thing which may come as a surprise to my fellow Labour peers is that in the 14 years I have been here, I have never once voted against the party.
I think that party loyalty is a very crucial part of our constitutional system so I'm just saying that this is a very important matter to me. It is not a matter of conscience. Conscience is a still small voice. So, this is a matter of obligation from which I speak. I am the Lord of Stoke Newington and of Stanford Hill. Stoke Newington doesn't really matter in this case because they don't care, but Stanford Hill is the centre of the last remnant of European hissy Dick choose.
During their origin in 17th-century Ukraine but also Poland, around there, of the 6 million who were murdered by the Nazis, 3 1/2 million were Hasidic Jews. They were absolutely devastated. They are very strange bunch. Very mystic. Very spiritual. Absolutely not involved in Zionism or things like that. They refuse to serve those who serve in the military army. They are very committed to exile and a kind of redemption through prayer. So, for those here who are Muslim, I would say they are very close to the Sufi tendency there, for those who are Christian, I would say actually probably closer to the Amish.
Like that film Witness with Harrison Ford, that moment with the child. I Ford, that moment with the child. I was brought up close to them but not of them. My story is different. I became a socialist and an atheist and my troubles began. Also probably the parties trouble began at that moment. But I have always had a relationship with them, both family and personal, and to me, they are a very precious remnant of a destroyed culture, and it is a glory to the country that this very peculiar religious community only could exist in our country.
It only survived in our country. I can tell stories I was told when I was young. They had no idea. Although rabbis, or their community, their family was in Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, those areas. After the war, there was no one there. I met people who went on delegations to find the family. I travelled all through Ukraine, got to the villages, gone to the towns where genes were 60, 70%. It is all gone. The synagogues are ruined, the cemeteries are desecrated.
Only in our country did this community survive, and they are a historical anomaly. They shouldn't really exist. They should have been wiped out. It was mainly the Nazis. The Bolsheviks, the communists absolutely laid them to waste. They abolish religious education, the sheep is where illegal. So I think we should takes great pride in the fact that our country is unique in Europe and having some kind of continuity of this community. And the way that things were sorted out with the yeshivas, and Lord Lucas, I heard very carefully what you said and I share completely this to find some accommodation and understanding of how this works.
It is a ridiculous statement that I have to be in Stanford Hill and defend the accusation of being a Bolshevik. I assure them I am absolutely not, but the memory of the community is precisely reminiscent of the Soviet Union. Suddenly, the education will be banned. Their way of life will be criminalised. And they are packing their bags. It is a very moving situation. So, not a matter of conscience for me but absolutely a matter of obligation.
The arrangement we came to in the 1944 act was very wise in my opinion. It absolutely is vital to say that the accommodation was based on the yeshivas. The children are home educated. However, they spend an awful lot of time studying the Talmud, studying these things. I can assure you that I am very grateful not to be part of that, but that is what they do. And so, the children are homeschooled. Now, in this bill, generally I support it, and I would have supported unconditionally if it wasn't for this area.
On the case of the well-being, I worked for many years until he died with Rabbi pincer who was relieved of the community in terms of educational matters. The have been enormous steps forward in relation to homeschooling. There is internet packages, and I'm assuring you that the parents of these children are absolutely committed to their well- Every place has a phone number, designated officer and I can testify there have been huge changes regarding their well-being and safeguards around children, and I really commend them for that.
However, their way of life is very much based on the study of the Bible, of the Torah, and within Bible, of the Torah, and within that, they do maths, they do textual analysis. The quality of the education is very different in its structure. The purpose of the amendment is to restore the 19 restore the 1944 modus vivendi. restore the 1944 modus vivendi. Yeshivas are not schools but places of religious education.
I know from extensive discussions with the community that they are absolutely ready to engage. When it comes to the safeguarding measures, as I say, and fully persuaded they have taken resolute and determinate action across the community. I'm always turning up to the yeshivas, I'm always turning up, and they call me the Lord Above which might sound sacrilegious but it is the Lord that lives above a shop. And present in that community, ensuring that the safeguarding and well-being is safeguarding and well-being is adequately enforced -- I am present.
What I say to my government is that I don't think for a moment there was any intention to persecute or render illegal -- prosecute or render illegal Hasidic education. Sometimes, there are unintended consequences. What's happened is due to the freezing of the bill, the very foundation of the way of being -- way of living in the Hasidic community is under threat. They are very anxious. All I ask is if anything in this bill undermines the structure, it gives us the opportunity to discuss together how to reach an appropriate settlement that can put the well-being of the child at the centre, that can put the safeguarding of children absolutely and unconditionally in place, and also the quality of the home education.
This is the idea that has been really attended to. I can bear witness to this. All they are asking is to be able to express their anxiety.
I think that party loyalty is a very crucial part of our constitutional system so I'm just saying that this is a very important matter to me. It is not a matter of conscience. Conscience is a still small voice. So, this is a matter of obligation from which I speak. I am the Lord of Stoke Newington and of Stanford Hill. Stoke Newington doesn't really matter in this case because they don't care, but Stanford Hill is the centre of the last remnant of European hissy Dick choose.
During their origin in 17th-century Ukraine but also Poland, around there, of the 6 million who were murdered by the Nazis, 3 1/2 million were Hasidic Jews. They were absolutely devastated. They are very strange bunch. Very mystic. Very spiritual. Absolutely not involved in Zionism or things like that. They refuse to serve those who serve in the military army. They are very committed to exile and a kind of redemption through prayer. So, for those here who are Muslim, I would say they are very close to the Sufi tendency there, for those who are Christian, I would say actually probably closer to the Amish.
Like that film Witness with Harrison Ford, that moment with the child. I Ford, that moment with the child. I was brought up close to them but not of them. My story is different. I became a socialist and an atheist and my troubles began. Also probably the parties trouble began at that moment. But I have always had a relationship with them, both family and personal, and to me, they are a very precious remnant of a destroyed culture, and it is a glory to the country that this very peculiar religious community only could exist in our country.
It only survived in our country. I can tell stories I was told when I was young. They had no idea. Although rabbis, or their community, their family was in Ukraine, Poland, Hungary, those areas. After the war, there was no one there. I met people who went on delegations to find the family. I travelled all through Ukraine, got to the villages, gone to the towns where genes were 60, 70%. It is all gone. The synagogues are ruined, the cemeteries are desecrated.
Only in our country did this community survive, and they are a historical anomaly. They shouldn't really exist. They should have been wiped out. It was mainly the Nazis. The Bolsheviks, the communists absolutely laid them to waste. They abolish religious education, the sheep is where illegal. So I think we should takes great pride in the fact that our country is unique in Europe and having some kind of continuity of this community. And the way that things were sorted out with the yeshivas, and Lord Lucas, I heard very carefully what you said and I share completely this to find some accommodation and understanding of how this works.
It is a ridiculous statement that I have to be in Stanford Hill and defend the accusation of being a Bolshevik. I assure them I am absolutely not, but the memory of the community is precisely reminiscent of the Soviet Union. Suddenly, the education will be banned. Their way of life will be criminalised. And they are packing their bags. It is a very moving situation. So, not a matter of conscience for me but absolutely a matter of obligation.
The arrangement we came to in the 1944 act was very wise in my opinion. It absolutely is vital to say that the accommodation was based on the yeshivas. The children are home educated. However, they spend an awful lot of time studying the Talmud, studying these things. I can assure you that I am very grateful not to be part of that, but that is what they do. And so, the children are homeschooled. Now, in this bill, generally I support it, and I would have supported unconditionally if it wasn't for this area.
On the case of the well-being, I worked for many years until he died with Rabbi pincer who was relieved of the community in terms of educational matters. The have been enormous steps forward in relation to homeschooling. There is internet packages, and I'm assuring you that the parents of these children are absolutely committed to their well- Every place has a phone number, designated officer and I can testify there have been huge changes regarding their well-being and safeguards around children, and I really commend them for that.
However, their way of life is very much based on the study of the Bible, of the Torah, and within Bible, of the Torah, and within that, they do maths, they do textual analysis. The quality of the education is very different in its structure. The purpose of the amendment is to restore the 19 restore the 1944 modus vivendi. restore the 1944 modus vivendi. Yeshivas are not schools but places of religious education.
I know from extensive discussions with the community that they are absolutely ready to engage. When it comes to the safeguarding measures, as I say, and fully persuaded they have taken resolute and determinate action across the community. I'm always turning up to the yeshivas, I'm always turning up, and they call me the Lord Above which might sound sacrilegious but it is the Lord that lives above a shop. And present in that community, ensuring that the safeguarding and well-being is safeguarding and well-being is adequately enforced -- I am present.
What I say to my government is that I don't think for a moment there was any intention to persecute or render illegal -- prosecute or render illegal Hasidic education. Sometimes, there are unintended consequences. What's happened is due to the freezing of the bill, the very foundation of the way of being -- way of living in the Hasidic community is under threat. They are very anxious. All I ask is if anything in this bill undermines the structure, it gives us the opportunity to discuss together how to reach an appropriate settlement that can put the well-being of the child at the centre, that can put the safeguarding of children absolutely and unconditionally in place, and also the quality of the home education.
This is the idea that has been really attended to. I can bear witness to this. All they are asking is to be able to express their anxiety.
12:19
Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Non-affiliated)
-
-
Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Non-affiliated)
I want to speak very briefly to overall support of amendment set out by the Bishop of Oxford and the Bishop of Manchester. Also the Lord My comments are not directed just to the Minister but also to her officials. I would encourage them to really engage with the thrust of this was. If this is not the right wording, then something along those lines because any of us who have served time at the Department of education know that these are difficult issues relating to and have become more complicated.
And whilst we have heard particular focus on a particular religious group, I know from people's conversations both in relation to receivers -- yeshivas and other religious institutions, there is always a reason why there should be an exception. We also know there are going to be those who seek to subvert any exception for the wrong reasons and that is the young people who would lose out. What attracts me to this amount is the fact that obviously the local authority would be involved in terms of both registration but also safeguarding and assurance.
I have little concern... Don't want to go back to 1944 when the world was very different. Overall, as we heard, there are many communities who do want to both comply with the law but also to have their practices and customs respected and I really hope that when we get to the next stage of the bill, we can find a way through so that these provisions are able to go through supported by this whole house.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to oppose the amendment
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to oppose the amendment 427C. I do so whilst treading with great care. I realise both the history and sensitivities and the passion and commitment of the people passion and commitment of the people involved. I don't pretend to be part of that community or to criticise it
And whilst we have heard particular focus on a particular religious group, I know from people's conversations both in relation to receivers -- yeshivas and other religious institutions, there is always a reason why there should be an exception. We also know there are going to be those who seek to subvert any exception for the wrong reasons and that is the young people who would lose out. What attracts me to this amount is the fact that obviously the local authority would be involved in terms of both registration but also safeguarding and assurance.
I have little concern... Don't want to go back to 1944 when the world was very different. Overall, as we heard, there are many communities who do want to both comply with the law but also to have their practices and customs respected and I really hope that when we get to the next stage of the bill, we can find a way through so that these provisions are able to go through supported by this whole house.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to oppose the amendment
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to oppose the amendment 427C. I do so whilst treading with great care. I realise both the history and sensitivities and the passion and commitment of the people passion and commitment of the people involved. I don't pretend to be part of that community or to criticise it
12:22
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
in anyway. I'm very proud that our country welcomes people of all faiths. I've always been a defender of faith schools. I served on the board of Church of England Schools. That's the background I come from. I cannot support this amendment. Over the past 12 months, together with the noble Baroness, I've had the privilege of meeting some young adults who have been a students at yeshivas and educated within the system and look within the community. And to be honest, they would not recognise the description that Lord Glasman has just given.
They would not describe their own education and their own lives in that way. I think our starting point should be that as with any school, any community, there is a risk to children if we don't protect them in an orderly way in the way that we should. I'm not opposed to this community being able to continue to educate in its own faith. Why wouldn't we wish it to do that? When we allow any other faith to the same. But that is already possible.
There are already registered schools where parents can sound -- send their children. It's not the case of if you close down the yeshivas, no one can have a faith school based in this FA. What I do have a problem with is the yeshiva. This is where I oppose amendment 427C and my argument for it is very straightforward. If you were there at the age of eight -- if you were there and -- if you were there at eight in the morning and leave out Sue -- at six, it's not the school.
It is not easy and there's an element of compromise. But what I heard from people that I've spoken to so far is that will welcome the bill, we all want things to be regulated to protect children but not this. Not this religion, not this fate, not this group. I can't buy into that. I want to say that I think every child, including children in this community, deserve to be safeguarded and deserve to have a broad and balanced education. Unless you register it, I can't see how it happens.
Where I think the debate comes is about the nature of the registration and the consultation with the community. And I would absolutely urge the Minister, as I know she will have done already, as Baroness Barran spoke about as well, I would not want to support anything that excluded children from this community not to be safeguarded in the way that children from all other communities are.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to support what my noble friend Baroness Morris has just friend Baroness Morris has just ... I'm ... I'm familiar ... I'm familiar with ... I'm familiar with this ... I'm familiar with this community and I admire a great deal of what they do but I'm very concerned about they do but I'm very concerned about what is happening to some of the boys in this community. I share the boys in this community.
I share the concern but it's not only on the meetings I have had with Baroness Morris with some of the young men Morris with some of the young men who have been through these who have been through these institutions, but also with the very, I think, good charity which is very, I think, good charity which is called Nahamu, which is concerned about the abuses of children which are taking place in these particular are taking place in these particular types of yeshiva and North London and Manchester.
The trustees of this and Manchester. The trustees of this charity are proudly Jewish and they are members of the Orthodox Jewish community. They are concerned about what is happening to the fellow Jewish young men, boys, and I think we should respect that concern in considering how we approach the whole issue of these yeshivas. I will speak at greater length in the next group about what I and Baroness Morris think we should do in order to make sure that these young men get the education they deserve, which they are not doing at the which they are not doing at the moment, and their experience is -- and that their experience is properly safeguarded.
They would not describe their own education and their own lives in that way. I think our starting point should be that as with any school, any community, there is a risk to children if we don't protect them in an orderly way in the way that we should. I'm not opposed to this community being able to continue to educate in its own faith. Why wouldn't we wish it to do that? When we allow any other faith to the same. But that is already possible.
There are already registered schools where parents can sound -- send their children. It's not the case of if you close down the yeshivas, no one can have a faith school based in this FA. What I do have a problem with is the yeshiva. This is where I oppose amendment 427C and my argument for it is very straightforward. If you were there at the age of eight -- if you were there and -- if you were there at eight in the morning and leave out Sue -- at six, it's not the school.
It is not easy and there's an element of compromise. But what I heard from people that I've spoken to so far is that will welcome the bill, we all want things to be regulated to protect children but not this. Not this religion, not this fate, not this group. I can't buy into that. I want to say that I think every child, including children in this community, deserve to be safeguarded and deserve to have a broad and balanced education. Unless you register it, I can't see how it happens.
Where I think the debate comes is about the nature of the registration and the consultation with the community. And I would absolutely urge the Minister, as I know she will have done already, as Baroness Barran spoke about as well, I would not want to support anything that excluded children from this community not to be safeguarded in the way that children from all other communities are.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to support what my noble friend Baroness Morris has just friend Baroness Morris has just ... I'm ... I'm familiar ... I'm familiar with ... I'm familiar with this ... I'm familiar with this community and I admire a great deal of what they do but I'm very concerned about they do but I'm very concerned about what is happening to some of the boys in this community. I share the boys in this community.
I share the concern but it's not only on the meetings I have had with Baroness Morris with some of the young men Morris with some of the young men who have been through these who have been through these institutions, but also with the very, I think, good charity which is very, I think, good charity which is called Nahamu, which is concerned about the abuses of children which are taking place in these particular are taking place in these particular types of yeshiva and North London and Manchester.
The trustees of this and Manchester. The trustees of this charity are proudly Jewish and they are members of the Orthodox Jewish community. They are concerned about what is happening to the fellow Jewish young men, boys, and I think we should respect that concern in considering how we approach the whole issue of these yeshivas. I will speak at greater length in the next group about what I and Baroness Morris think we should do in order to make sure that these young men get the education they deserve, which they are not doing at the which they are not doing at the moment, and their experience is -- and that their experience is properly safeguarded.
12:28
Baroness Blackstone (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Blackstone (Labour)
I rise to support the amendment in the name of the Right Reverend Prelate Bishop of Manchester, but Lewis and Lord Glasman. To close 36, the amendment seeks to ensure that institutions which provide only religious instruction alongside guaranteed out-of-school education are not wrongly categorised as
12:29
Lord Marks of Hale (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Marks of Hale (Conservative)
independent educational institutions under this bill. Education in this under this bill. Education in this country has never been one size fits all state-run system. Homeschooling all state-run system. Homeschooling remains every parent's legal right. One community, however, has been singled out by clause 36, and that singled out by clause 36, and that is the Orthodox Jewish unity. It's boys attend yeshivas which are boys attend yeshivas which are supervised religious settings alongside receiving homeschooling. As one professor remarked about the As one professor remarked about the bill's intentions which in its bill's intentions which in its supplemented document almost exclusively singled out that that exclusively singled out that that community is that it's fine to be Jewish in the UK in 2025 as long as Jewish in the UK in 2025 as long as you are not to Jewish.
-- too. That you are not to Jewish. -- too. That should not be. Yeshivas are not schools and they cannot become schools. Their religious spaces schools. Their religious spaces operating alongside homeschooling with an entirely different purpose. with an entirely different purpose. There are settings where young men engage deeply with their heritage, develop their spiritual and ethical character and absorb the wisdom and traditions of the Jewish, rabbinic copiers. -- corpeas. This is different to teaching subjects like geography and history.
Inculcating one's children into the lift faith must be an immersive experience. That is what yeshivas are all about. This is also why they are so central to our faith community. Yeshivas operate as supervised spaces with robust safeguarding and health and safety arrangements in place. They allow sufficient and flexible breaks to enable attendees to continue their homeschooling alongside yeshiva. Yeshivas are not illegal schools, they are not schools at all. They operate alongside homeschooling arrangements and the children there do not have access to television, smart phones, video It makes the days longer and more suitable for homeschooling.
For the horrendous community, the home in the synagogue play a large and stable role with education and communal life of these children. A three pronged model once widespread three pronged model once widespread across the UK. Yeshivas maintain robust safeguarding measures and provide safe and supportive environments where students thrive with mentorship, P interaction, and structured learning. Graduates go on to contribute significantly to a bustling social and economic community. To reclassify yeshivas as independent institutions with simply undermine their purpose and force them to close.
It can even leave many children without the structure, support or space for their religious life, and it would do great damage to thriving contributing faith community. Some critics claim Orthodox communities failed to beach basic skills, that comes from antiquated lobbyists, not educational charities. Engaged with the bill about child welfare, it should teach us to listen to small minority voices and not only to those most powerful and vocal. Humanist UK are entitled to their views, but Orthodox Jews are entitled to their faith.
In reality, much work is underway to strengthen homeschooling, standards and resources. I therefore urge the noble Lord the Minister to accept this amendment so that yeshivas are recognised for what they are, faith spaces operating alongside home education and not forced into a category in which they do not
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Jewish. In support of Amendment 451 in the name of Lord Storey, perhaps he the name of Lord Storey, perhaps he will introduce it when he winds up will introduce it when he winds up from the frontbench. What I have to say is probably relevant to the wider aspects of this debate. I am a patron of humanist UK. I have patron of humanist UK. I have listened to children speaking about the unregistered schools that they the unregistered schools that they went to of all faiths.
And of course, this is only about some schools. Nevertheless, I was very schools. Nevertheless, I was very struck by what they had to say about the paucity of the curriculum. Often the paucity of the curriculum. Often the enforced dogma of what was taught. Sometimes abuse and taught. Sometimes abuse and sometimes in very antisocial, antidemocratic ethos. This doesn't antidemocratic ethos. This doesn't represent all faith schools at all, but those children themselves were but those children themselves were not alone. I do think, in short, we not alone.
I do think, in short, we need to get a grip on unregistered need to get a grip on unregistered schools, especially as in Lord Storey's amendment in the case of children for whom education has not been working well. So, I very much look forward to my noble friend the Ministers explanation of how we can Ministers explanation of how we can navigate this real problem in the navigate this real problem in the free and diverse society we live in as we must navigate it as not all schools are good.
-- too. That you are not to Jewish. -- too. That should not be. Yeshivas are not schools and they cannot become schools. Their religious spaces schools. Their religious spaces operating alongside homeschooling with an entirely different purpose. with an entirely different purpose. There are settings where young men engage deeply with their heritage, develop their spiritual and ethical character and absorb the wisdom and traditions of the Jewish, rabbinic copiers. -- corpeas. This is different to teaching subjects like geography and history.
Inculcating one's children into the lift faith must be an immersive experience. That is what yeshivas are all about. This is also why they are so central to our faith community. Yeshivas operate as supervised spaces with robust safeguarding and health and safety arrangements in place. They allow sufficient and flexible breaks to enable attendees to continue their homeschooling alongside yeshiva. Yeshivas are not illegal schools, they are not schools at all. They operate alongside homeschooling arrangements and the children there do not have access to television, smart phones, video It makes the days longer and more suitable for homeschooling.
For the horrendous community, the home in the synagogue play a large and stable role with education and communal life of these children. A three pronged model once widespread three pronged model once widespread across the UK. Yeshivas maintain robust safeguarding measures and provide safe and supportive environments where students thrive with mentorship, P interaction, and structured learning. Graduates go on to contribute significantly to a bustling social and economic community. To reclassify yeshivas as independent institutions with simply undermine their purpose and force them to close.
It can even leave many children without the structure, support or space for their religious life, and it would do great damage to thriving contributing faith community. Some critics claim Orthodox communities failed to beach basic skills, that comes from antiquated lobbyists, not educational charities. Engaged with the bill about child welfare, it should teach us to listen to small minority voices and not only to those most powerful and vocal. Humanist UK are entitled to their views, but Orthodox Jews are entitled to their faith.
In reality, much work is underway to strengthen homeschooling, standards and resources. I therefore urge the noble Lord the Minister to accept this amendment so that yeshivas are recognised for what they are, faith spaces operating alongside home education and not forced into a category in which they do not
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Jewish. In support of Amendment 451 in the name of Lord Storey, perhaps he the name of Lord Storey, perhaps he will introduce it when he winds up will introduce it when he winds up from the frontbench. What I have to say is probably relevant to the wider aspects of this debate. I am a patron of humanist UK. I have patron of humanist UK. I have listened to children speaking about the unregistered schools that they the unregistered schools that they went to of all faiths.
And of course, this is only about some schools. Nevertheless, I was very schools. Nevertheless, I was very struck by what they had to say about the paucity of the curriculum. Often the paucity of the curriculum. Often the enforced dogma of what was taught. Sometimes abuse and taught. Sometimes abuse and sometimes in very antisocial, antidemocratic ethos. This doesn't antidemocratic ethos. This doesn't represent all faith schools at all, but those children themselves were but those children themselves were not alone. I do think, in short, we not alone.
I do think, in short, we need to get a grip on unregistered need to get a grip on unregistered schools, especially as in Lord Storey's amendment in the case of children for whom education has not been working well. So, I very much look forward to my noble friend the Ministers explanation of how we can Ministers explanation of how we can navigate this real problem in the navigate this real problem in the free and diverse society we live in as we must navigate it as not all schools are good.
12:35
12:36
Lord Sentamu (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Sentamu (Crossbench)
I understood right, they are concerned around whether these concerned around whether these pupils are being self. Now, if you pupils are being self. Now, if you look at the amendments, it says where the institution demonstrates local authority that it provides the local authority that it provides the required safeguarding measures. And that is pretty important, because if it didn't, I would be joining those it didn't, I would be joining those who want to have this amendment, but the fact that these particular groups that it is wrong to call them groups that it is wrong to call them schools, it is wrong to provide for education, the only thing provided is in homeschooling, and in terms of safeguarding, the amendment is very clear that the local authority is satisfied with safeguarding measures being in place.
So, those arguments being in place. So, those arguments being in place. So, those arguments for me fall away because that is around whether it is sufficient safeguarding for these particular safeguarding for these particular pupils, and because the amendment is quite sensitive in reality, I was not going to speak to it or support it. Now I have had the arguments, I am persuaded that it actually answers the question, and therefore, I am bound to support this
**** Possible New Speaker ****
particular amendment. I want to speak to this group amendments about the poorly
So, those arguments being in place. So, those arguments being in place. So, those arguments for me fall away because that is around whether it is sufficient safeguarding for these particular safeguarding for these particular pupils, and because the amendment is quite sensitive in reality, I was not going to speak to it or support it. Now I have had the arguments, I am persuaded that it actually answers the question, and therefore, I am bound to support this
**** Possible New Speaker ****
particular amendment. I want to speak to this group amendments about the poorly
12:36
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
understood world of unregistered provision, including the types of religious institution that have had a lot of discussion around it already. But also, looking more broadly, and I do support to Lord Lucas's amendments. 47 and 40 7B in particular. More broadly, clause 36 is a constructive attempt to put sensible controls in place around the oversight of educational provision for children outside schools and colleges. It creates a wider category of independent educational institution to supplement the narrower concept of an independent school, and this is a complicated and messy landscape.
The strands do overlap. There is the eternity of provisions. Most often for children with severe behavioural problems. There is a huge patchwork of provision there. Some of it has a level of quality control, but much of it is not, as there are not neat cut-offs. The school puts to members cut-offs. The school puts to members in the garden for one afternoon a week. That would be best viewed as part of the schools educational model, and the school would be accountable for the experience.
But if those same children are early attending schools, it is unrealistic to ignore the fact that the gardens become the children's main source of education. A complete education, and that school registration has become a fixture in, perhaps to avoid recording and exclusion. And it is often assumed that alternative provision is or should be a brief stint to prepare a child for reintegration into mainstream school. The reality is that very few children who move into alternative provision will successfully reintegrate. Hardly any such children take their GCSE in a mains dream school.
So it needs to be seen as a mode of education, not just as respite care. Then there is provision for children with psychological problems such as school refusals. Unregistered provision often born out of provisions, and if that is part of a plan to acclimatise to a suitable school, direct oversight may be overkill. But if it becomes a deaf actor permanent placement, it has become that child's main place of education. And it needs to work the same standards as other schools. Then it has been looking at children who have been educated.
And of course, parents are entitled to home educate, and they are part of around education. But if an organisation is running five different programs, one each day, the child attends all of them, and that point, the reality is that the organisation is best seen as having the characteristics of a school or an independent institution. Taking responsibility when parents are not present for a large part of the week. It is hard to see why such an entity should sit outside the legal framework that protects children's education.
And protects children's education. And finally, I would like to talk about illegal schools. It is depressing that illegal schools exist. It is even more depressing that some of them operate knowingly and intentionally outside the law. Often has a small budget to investigate illegal schools and to warn those that are outside the law that they must register with the Department of education. But it has also prosecuted pieties of school, at least one of them twice, and I don't think any of those prosecutions were related to Jewish affiliated institution.
Current legislation is not equipped to deal with bad faith not equipped to deal with bad faith organisers. It dates back to a time where it was unimaginable that a school admitted to register wouldn't do so when it was pointed out. And it has been extraordinarily easy for operators to sidestep the law. The kind of organisation where an operator teaching the same groups in operator teaching the same groups in the mornings in one location, and passing them to another location to be taught in the afternoon may claim that they are separate institutions than that neither reaches the threshold to be considered as a school, but clearly, the reality is that it is a single school.
That is why support for amendment 427B, there needs to be a sensible ability to take holistic perspective so that avoidance doesn't really happen. And there are institutions, and we have had a lot of debate, who rely on the fact that children are not being taught subjects like English and mathematics but only an exclusively religious programme to say that they are not schools. Now, it is a shocking fact that there are British citizens reaching adult hood without the most basic education that they need to take their full part in British society in the workplace if they choose as adults.
Now, they may not choose but to pre-emptively take away their capacity to do that should concern us deeply. And it does seem unreasonable that an institution that is part of such a model should want to be outside the scope of any meaningful scrutiny. And we know from any previous cases that, sadly, a strong religious affiliation is not a guarantee that children will be completely protected from the kinds of harm that can come from adults inflicting on them.
And I think it is worrying that so many people don't want to acknowledge or discuss this problem intentionally. I think there is widespread hesitancy to venture into sensitive areas linked to faith or ethnic city. We have seen this with other issues arising recently as well, and I can see the temptation of offering an opt out, and yet, I also know that the better part is to carry on working to try to find models that do a better job of reconciling the desires of the faith group and the important rights of children.
I know that many of my noble colleagues here, Lord Nash, Baroness Morgan, they all worked hard in their time in government to try and find those next steps, those better accommodations, and opt out is just not sensible or workable, and the point that this country has become simply a patchwork of self segregated communities cut off from one another, there won't be much of a nation left. And I will note that there is an evolving picture internationally around the same issues that we have been seeing in schools in England.
As chief, I talk to my counterparts which are seeing parallel trends. This is something that needs discussing not just domestic but internationally. And I believe that it is impossible and undesirable to try to make tidy regulatory categories covering every kind of provision outside school. They quickly become obsolete as would any micro-precise thresholds. So overall, this extension of scope is important and justified but it is also important that the regulations made are clear and well understood, that enforcement is adequately funded with enough resource for Ofsted to carry on its investigate rework and the DfE to act where it should, and does also have to be a high level of transparency about the work to help stave off, pre-empt attempts to brand this difficult work as biased or unfair, and we must carry on doing all that we can to make the intrinsically knotty subject matter here fully discussed
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I raised to support very strongly amendment 427 C and pay tribute to
The strands do overlap. There is the eternity of provisions. Most often for children with severe behavioural problems. There is a huge patchwork of provision there. Some of it has a level of quality control, but much of it is not, as there are not neat cut-offs. The school puts to members cut-offs. The school puts to members in the garden for one afternoon a week. That would be best viewed as part of the schools educational model, and the school would be accountable for the experience.
But if those same children are early attending schools, it is unrealistic to ignore the fact that the gardens become the children's main source of education. A complete education, and that school registration has become a fixture in, perhaps to avoid recording and exclusion. And it is often assumed that alternative provision is or should be a brief stint to prepare a child for reintegration into mainstream school. The reality is that very few children who move into alternative provision will successfully reintegrate. Hardly any such children take their GCSE in a mains dream school.
So it needs to be seen as a mode of education, not just as respite care. Then there is provision for children with psychological problems such as school refusals. Unregistered provision often born out of provisions, and if that is part of a plan to acclimatise to a suitable school, direct oversight may be overkill. But if it becomes a deaf actor permanent placement, it has become that child's main place of education. And it needs to work the same standards as other schools. Then it has been looking at children who have been educated.
And of course, parents are entitled to home educate, and they are part of around education. But if an organisation is running five different programs, one each day, the child attends all of them, and that point, the reality is that the organisation is best seen as having the characteristics of a school or an independent institution. Taking responsibility when parents are not present for a large part of the week. It is hard to see why such an entity should sit outside the legal framework that protects children's education.
And protects children's education. And finally, I would like to talk about illegal schools. It is depressing that illegal schools exist. It is even more depressing that some of them operate knowingly and intentionally outside the law. Often has a small budget to investigate illegal schools and to warn those that are outside the law that they must register with the Department of education. But it has also prosecuted pieties of school, at least one of them twice, and I don't think any of those prosecutions were related to Jewish affiliated institution.
Current legislation is not equipped to deal with bad faith not equipped to deal with bad faith organisers. It dates back to a time where it was unimaginable that a school admitted to register wouldn't do so when it was pointed out. And it has been extraordinarily easy for operators to sidestep the law. The kind of organisation where an operator teaching the same groups in operator teaching the same groups in the mornings in one location, and passing them to another location to be taught in the afternoon may claim that they are separate institutions than that neither reaches the threshold to be considered as a school, but clearly, the reality is that it is a single school.
That is why support for amendment 427B, there needs to be a sensible ability to take holistic perspective so that avoidance doesn't really happen. And there are institutions, and we have had a lot of debate, who rely on the fact that children are not being taught subjects like English and mathematics but only an exclusively religious programme to say that they are not schools. Now, it is a shocking fact that there are British citizens reaching adult hood without the most basic education that they need to take their full part in British society in the workplace if they choose as adults.
Now, they may not choose but to pre-emptively take away their capacity to do that should concern us deeply. And it does seem unreasonable that an institution that is part of such a model should want to be outside the scope of any meaningful scrutiny. And we know from any previous cases that, sadly, a strong religious affiliation is not a guarantee that children will be completely protected from the kinds of harm that can come from adults inflicting on them.
And I think it is worrying that so many people don't want to acknowledge or discuss this problem intentionally. I think there is widespread hesitancy to venture into sensitive areas linked to faith or ethnic city. We have seen this with other issues arising recently as well, and I can see the temptation of offering an opt out, and yet, I also know that the better part is to carry on working to try to find models that do a better job of reconciling the desires of the faith group and the important rights of children.
I know that many of my noble colleagues here, Lord Nash, Baroness Morgan, they all worked hard in their time in government to try and find those next steps, those better accommodations, and opt out is just not sensible or workable, and the point that this country has become simply a patchwork of self segregated communities cut off from one another, there won't be much of a nation left. And I will note that there is an evolving picture internationally around the same issues that we have been seeing in schools in England.
As chief, I talk to my counterparts which are seeing parallel trends. This is something that needs discussing not just domestic but internationally. And I believe that it is impossible and undesirable to try to make tidy regulatory categories covering every kind of provision outside school. They quickly become obsolete as would any micro-precise thresholds. So overall, this extension of scope is important and justified but it is also important that the regulations made are clear and well understood, that enforcement is adequately funded with enough resource for Ofsted to carry on its investigate rework and the DfE to act where it should, and does also have to be a high level of transparency about the work to help stave off, pre-empt attempts to brand this difficult work as biased or unfair, and we must carry on doing all that we can to make the intrinsically knotty subject matter here fully discussed
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I raised to support very strongly amendment 427 C and pay tribute to
12:46
Baroness Hoey (Non-affiliated)
-
-
Baroness Hoey (Non-affiliated)
amendment 427 C and pay tribute to the two opening speeches from the Right Reverend Prelate and Lord Glasman. All the speeches they have shown alight on what I think many people in the country are not aware of. As a councillor in Hackney many years ago, I knew this community and what I thought was particularly interesting in Lord Glasman's speech was he was able to explain how much effort has gone into improving the whole question of safeguarding. That is something we are all very concerned about in any school.
What this issue is about for me very clearly is that yeshiva are not schools. They are no more a school than the Sunday school I went to for many years as a youngster. Nothing to do with the church, it was a separate Sunday school set up by some very nice people in the countryside and I went every Sunday afternoon for many, many years. That was not at school in the sense of education. It was about religion, it was about understanding the history of Christianity and all of those kinds of things.
I can see exactly what that yeshiva schools are doing. I think perhaps the government... Does seem that under clause 35 of the bill, they will be regulated as if they were schools -- clause. That is wrong. We know what goes on the. It is for young men who engage with their heritage and build their spiritual and ethical character. All of that goes on. The noble Baroness Morris mentioned about some of the young men she had spoken to who were unhappy or whatever about what had happened.
I'm sure if we went round many of our schools and spoke to young men about what was going on in their school, we would find, always find somebody who has a real problem. But that doesn't mean that what is happening overall, there is anything wrong with it. It seems to me there has been very little - and maybe I'm wrong and the noble Lady the Minister can tell me I'm wrong - but there didn't seem to be any real prior engagement before the bill was drafted with the community, and the central role that that yeshiva schools play in the communities.
I mean, was there any real discussion? It seems to me, listening to what has been said, we have got underlining support for safeguarding. Surely, this would have been something that if there had been time spent in the Department talking to the community, knowing what was going on in those schools, talking to the local authorities about what they see, then this could have been solved in a way without bringing, without having to have an amendment like this, without having to go through this whole debate.
It could have been solved by a bit of common sense, goodwill and people sitting... There is sensible, practical solution that will allow the yeshiva schools to stay open. I call it a school but I'm not implying there are school as I said earlier. There are not a school in the sense that we know what a school is. We can address any concerns that there still are about safeguarding and the links with home education. We must try and settle this otherwise.
We will see all of those closing and then we will be left with a very, very much more difficult situation to handle. I would urge the noble Lady recognising just how many people feel strongly about this. This is something that really needs to be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
looked at. I had not participated speaking until the next group but I declare an interest because I'm a senior an interest because I'm a senior research fellow at Oxford University. A number of peers have
What this issue is about for me very clearly is that yeshiva are not schools. They are no more a school than the Sunday school I went to for many years as a youngster. Nothing to do with the church, it was a separate Sunday school set up by some very nice people in the countryside and I went every Sunday afternoon for many, many years. That was not at school in the sense of education. It was about religion, it was about understanding the history of Christianity and all of those kinds of things.
I can see exactly what that yeshiva schools are doing. I think perhaps the government... Does seem that under clause 35 of the bill, they will be regulated as if they were schools -- clause. That is wrong. We know what goes on the. It is for young men who engage with their heritage and build their spiritual and ethical character. All of that goes on. The noble Baroness Morris mentioned about some of the young men she had spoken to who were unhappy or whatever about what had happened.
I'm sure if we went round many of our schools and spoke to young men about what was going on in their school, we would find, always find somebody who has a real problem. But that doesn't mean that what is happening overall, there is anything wrong with it. It seems to me there has been very little - and maybe I'm wrong and the noble Lady the Minister can tell me I'm wrong - but there didn't seem to be any real prior engagement before the bill was drafted with the community, and the central role that that yeshiva schools play in the communities.
I mean, was there any real discussion? It seems to me, listening to what has been said, we have got underlining support for safeguarding. Surely, this would have been something that if there had been time spent in the Department talking to the community, knowing what was going on in those schools, talking to the local authorities about what they see, then this could have been solved in a way without bringing, without having to have an amendment like this, without having to go through this whole debate.
It could have been solved by a bit of common sense, goodwill and people sitting... There is sensible, practical solution that will allow the yeshiva schools to stay open. I call it a school but I'm not implying there are school as I said earlier. There are not a school in the sense that we know what a school is. We can address any concerns that there still are about safeguarding and the links with home education. We must try and settle this otherwise.
We will see all of those closing and then we will be left with a very, very much more difficult situation to handle. I would urge the noble Lady recognising just how many people feel strongly about this. This is something that really needs to be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
looked at. I had not participated speaking until the next group but I declare an interest because I'm a senior an interest because I'm a senior research fellow at Oxford University. A number of peers have
12:50
Baroness Berridge (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Berridge (Conservative)
University. A number of peers have just entered into this human right without fully appreciating the impact of it. Firstly, in relation to the institution, and that in the amendment how it's referred to, it's referred to as an institution. I wonder if the noble Lady the Minister can outline if this amendment were to be accepted, where it sits with the other out-of-school settings. I don't think these are charities because you would be already under safeguarding responsibilities as a charity.
Could there be good unintended consequences of the amendment that we taken out of school setting and bring it into the safeguarding world bring it into the safeguarding world and DBS cheques -- checks? It sometimes put into debate as if religious belief is an unlimited right. I think it is important to remember that children have freedom to religion or belief. Children do, and this is the very difficult word, and it's also in the Christian context and other faith context and even I think in some atheist traditions, of trying to immune a child from knowledge so they never choose a different type of Jewishness or a different religion for themselves.
I do hope that whatever situation we end up in with regard to these particular schools, that we bear in mind that these children have a freedom of religion or belief and should have an education that enables them to exercise that right fully. I do hope that will be part of the considerations and the engagement with the community as we come to a position on these institutions. As it is accepted in the amendment, they are institutions. Not some kind of faith space.
They are an institution of some category.
Could there be good unintended consequences of the amendment that we taken out of school setting and bring it into the safeguarding world bring it into the safeguarding world and DBS cheques -- checks? It sometimes put into debate as if religious belief is an unlimited right. I think it is important to remember that children have freedom to religion or belief. Children do, and this is the very difficult word, and it's also in the Christian context and other faith context and even I think in some atheist traditions, of trying to immune a child from knowledge so they never choose a different type of Jewishness or a different religion for themselves.
I do hope that whatever situation we end up in with regard to these particular schools, that we bear in mind that these children have a freedom of religion or belief and should have an education that enables them to exercise that right fully. I do hope that will be part of the considerations and the engagement with the community as we come to a position on these institutions. As it is accepted in the amendment, they are institutions. Not some kind of faith space.
They are an institution of some category.
12:52
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
My Lords, I would start by saying that I was the head of a Church of England primary school. My daughter went to a Jewish school and I'm conscious that in my home city of Liverpool, one third of schools are faith schools. I want to reflect on what various peers have said and I want to speak very carefully because I'm still considering everything that's been said. I found it at times, if I'm to be honest, quite challenging.
Let me deal with an issue that which I don't find challenging, that is a man .451. -- Amendment 451. Children who are suspended from school, the school has responsibility for them. Pupils who are permanently excluded from school, the local authority has responsibility for them. Although often secondary schools which have pupil referral units are often able to put those students were suspended into a referral unit, and I have been and visited many of them and been absolutely astounded, impressed with how they have supported that particular student and the instances of explosion, permanent exclusions are now very limited.
Often, let's remember that young people who are permanently excluded from school permanently excluded from school often have severe behavioural issues, which perhaps could have been picked up when they were younger, perhaps they could have been supported in a different way. But any of them have severe behavioural problems. Many of them, quite a high percentage - I think it quite a high percentage - I think it is certainly over 80% - have special needs. They are the very young people who should not be excluded from school.
They should be in school. But clearly schools have a right to teach, pupils have a right to learn. So when they are excluded from school, local authorities will often put them into what we call alternative provision. And there are two types of alternative provision. There is the alternative provision which is registered. That means it is inspected from time to time by Ofsted. Again, I visited two alternative providers and have been incredibly impressed at what I've seen. Many local authorities choose not to put permanently excluded pupils into a registered provider but into an unregistered provider.
Why? Because it is much, much cheaper. That's no way to treat a young person. No way at all. And if you look at some of those unregistered providers, they don't keep a register, the young person comes and goes, there is no proper qualifications, teaching staff, etc etc. That's not to say, as I've mentioned in debates, that there are some unregistered providers were very good. But still, that is no way to treat a young people -- young person.
This amendment is very simple. All it says is that any alternative provider, i.e. Those schools, those units... And when we talk about a school, we are talking about a school of 20 pupils. Those schools should be registered so we know there is a qualified staff, qualified support, quality learning for those people's, and all the things we expect take place -- those pupils. And we also know that there will be from time to time Ofsted reports on those schools.
I've looked at many of those Ofsted reports and have been incredibly impressed by the work those alternative providers do. That is a simple request that we should not allow the most vulnerable children, young people in our society to be treated in this way. They have the right to go to a proper institution, proper school. And now I come to the other amendments. I agree probably... Not probably. I agree with Baroness Morris. Look, I want children, young people to have an education, whether it's on a school or in some cases at home, which is broad and balanced, which equips them for life, which they enjoy, which brings out the best qualities in that young person.
I do not want, and I remember several years ago, Baroness Berridge came to me with a discussion about particular faith school, particular religious school, a Christian school actually, which was where the pupils were treated in quite a challenging way. One boy, for example, happened to tell the school that he was gay so he was pushing a cupboard and locked in a cupboard until he came out and announced he was not gay. That school I think employed its own Ofsted inspection regime.
Not Ofsted, its own inspection regimes. And because it had its own inspection regimes, that company
**** Possible New Speaker ****
particularly... I'm not sure if the noble Lord is
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm not sure if the noble Lord is remembering the description accurately. accurately.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I only raise it because it was shocking. It was a schooling shocking. It was a schooling situation where young people were not able to be themselves and unable not able to be themselves and unable I respect different religions and as I say, my daughter goes to a Jewish I say, my daughter goes to a Jewish school and at that school there Hebrew lessons, the children are Hebrew lessons, the children are taken out for various times and there is a whole range of different faiths in that school.
The children's faces respected and opportunities for them to develop an understanding of faith happens and that is all good and positive. In terms of the issue that I am still terms of the issue that I am still thinking about, the amendment has been moved, and I personally do not I think, have a problem or an issue with that particular faith, whatever it is, bringing up children and people in that faith. What I want to see is that those children and young people still have schooling, schooling which is registered and inspected and I think that is all as a society we should ask for.
And anything which does not carry on the tradition that we in this country, which by the way is probably, I think, one of the most successful multicultural, multifaith nations in the world, any situation which does not develop what we believe in, I
**** Possible New Speaker ****
think we need to legislate against. I will keep my comments brief, I think we have had an excellent think we have had an excellent debate. On these benches, we do support the aims of this clause to
Let me deal with an issue that which I don't find challenging, that is a man .451. -- Amendment 451. Children who are suspended from school, the school has responsibility for them. Pupils who are permanently excluded from school, the local authority has responsibility for them. Although often secondary schools which have pupil referral units are often able to put those students were suspended into a referral unit, and I have been and visited many of them and been absolutely astounded, impressed with how they have supported that particular student and the instances of explosion, permanent exclusions are now very limited.
Often, let's remember that young people who are permanently excluded from school permanently excluded from school often have severe behavioural issues, which perhaps could have been picked up when they were younger, perhaps they could have been supported in a different way. But any of them have severe behavioural problems. Many of them, quite a high percentage - I think it quite a high percentage - I think it is certainly over 80% - have special needs. They are the very young people who should not be excluded from school.
They should be in school. But clearly schools have a right to teach, pupils have a right to learn. So when they are excluded from school, local authorities will often put them into what we call alternative provision. And there are two types of alternative provision. There is the alternative provision which is registered. That means it is inspected from time to time by Ofsted. Again, I visited two alternative providers and have been incredibly impressed at what I've seen. Many local authorities choose not to put permanently excluded pupils into a registered provider but into an unregistered provider.
Why? Because it is much, much cheaper. That's no way to treat a young person. No way at all. And if you look at some of those unregistered providers, they don't keep a register, the young person comes and goes, there is no proper qualifications, teaching staff, etc etc. That's not to say, as I've mentioned in debates, that there are some unregistered providers were very good. But still, that is no way to treat a young people -- young person.
This amendment is very simple. All it says is that any alternative provider, i.e. Those schools, those units... And when we talk about a school, we are talking about a school of 20 pupils. Those schools should be registered so we know there is a qualified staff, qualified support, quality learning for those people's, and all the things we expect take place -- those pupils. And we also know that there will be from time to time Ofsted reports on those schools.
I've looked at many of those Ofsted reports and have been incredibly impressed by the work those alternative providers do. That is a simple request that we should not allow the most vulnerable children, young people in our society to be treated in this way. They have the right to go to a proper institution, proper school. And now I come to the other amendments. I agree probably... Not probably. I agree with Baroness Morris. Look, I want children, young people to have an education, whether it's on a school or in some cases at home, which is broad and balanced, which equips them for life, which they enjoy, which brings out the best qualities in that young person.
I do not want, and I remember several years ago, Baroness Berridge came to me with a discussion about particular faith school, particular religious school, a Christian school actually, which was where the pupils were treated in quite a challenging way. One boy, for example, happened to tell the school that he was gay so he was pushing a cupboard and locked in a cupboard until he came out and announced he was not gay. That school I think employed its own Ofsted inspection regime.
Not Ofsted, its own inspection regimes. And because it had its own inspection regimes, that company
**** Possible New Speaker ****
particularly... I'm not sure if the noble Lord is
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm not sure if the noble Lord is remembering the description accurately. accurately.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I only raise it because it was shocking. It was a schooling shocking. It was a schooling situation where young people were not able to be themselves and unable not able to be themselves and unable I respect different religions and as I say, my daughter goes to a Jewish I say, my daughter goes to a Jewish school and at that school there Hebrew lessons, the children are Hebrew lessons, the children are taken out for various times and there is a whole range of different faiths in that school.
The children's faces respected and opportunities for them to develop an understanding of faith happens and that is all good and positive. In terms of the issue that I am still terms of the issue that I am still thinking about, the amendment has been moved, and I personally do not I think, have a problem or an issue with that particular faith, whatever it is, bringing up children and people in that faith. What I want to see is that those children and young people still have schooling, schooling which is registered and inspected and I think that is all as a society we should ask for.
And anything which does not carry on the tradition that we in this country, which by the way is probably, I think, one of the most successful multicultural, multifaith nations in the world, any situation which does not develop what we believe in, I
**** Possible New Speaker ****
think we need to legislate against. I will keep my comments brief, I think we have had an excellent think we have had an excellent debate. On these benches, we do support the aims of this clause to
13:02
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
support the aims of this clause to ensure that children learn in safe and regulated settings where they provide all or a majority of a child's education. In my brief comments, I do have a couple of technical points which I think might win the prize today for the most boring question asked of the Minister, but I wondered if the noble Lady could clarify a couple of things. I confess, I have tried to read and reread the bill and I still do not follow it.
In section 92 of the Education and Skills Act of 2008 which this clause amends, it includes institutions that offer part-time education within the definition of an independent educational institution. And I am just unclear what the status of those institutions will be in future and why they don't form part of the revised definition of the noble Lady wants to write, that is fine. I am sure there is a simple and obvious answer which I have missed. And also, the regulation making powers in the clause are much wider if I have understood them correctly than the 2008 act, some new section 92, subsection 3, C and D, seemed to give the Secretary of State unlimited flexibility to redefine full-time education without the proper scrutiny of Parliament and I suspect the noble Lady will tell me that this is using the affirmative procedure, but all of us know that that is very restricted scrutiny.
I am very pleased that my noble friend Lord Lucas has raised the issue of unregistered alternative provision, which benefits to be clear, neither from safeguarding nor from educational oversight in his amendment 427. And it is extraordinary, as are the noble Lord's have reflected, that rather like unregulated provision, we take very vulnerable children and young people and put them in unregistered provision without any of the safeguards available. So why agree with him -- so I agree with him that we would have no unregistered provision but at a minimum, I think this also applies to amendment 451, we would have some safeguarding regulation of those settings even if children going there for a short period of time, as always the infamous Dave the car mechanic, where apparently some children spend time, lease there we should have appropriate safeguarding checks.
I am interested what the noble Lady thinks about that. Turning to the amendments in this group in the name of my noble friend Lord Lucas, all of whom have raised issues that can arise for children whose parents choose an educational path that aligns to their religious tradition, and the Minister and the whole House have heard very clearly today both sides of the argument, the concerns, the valid concerns I think, that have been raised by particular faith groups about the impact of the government's legislation on their communities, very eloquently put in particular by the Right Reverend Robert the Bishop of Oxford on the noble Lord who I promise we will still listen to him however much he speaks.
I close by wishing to align myself to my noble friend Baroness Morgan of Cotes, I think we want to retain what I think the noble Lord described as the precious tolerance that many of us including my own family have benefited from, from this country welcoming them. But also, ensuring that the rights of every child are upheld and I hope very much that the noble Baroness the Minister will put her not
**** Possible New Speaker ****
task. First of all, can I say to the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
First of all, can I say to the noble Lady that she is right, those questions were very boring but nonetheless, I am sure important and I will write to the noble Lady to respond to those specific points. respond to those specific points. The rest of the debate however, was not boring but also important and I not boring but also important and I think, I hope I will be able to respond to the wide-ranging of issues that have been raised and the issues that have been raised and the conflicting positions that are part
In section 92 of the Education and Skills Act of 2008 which this clause amends, it includes institutions that offer part-time education within the definition of an independent educational institution. And I am just unclear what the status of those institutions will be in future and why they don't form part of the revised definition of the noble Lady wants to write, that is fine. I am sure there is a simple and obvious answer which I have missed. And also, the regulation making powers in the clause are much wider if I have understood them correctly than the 2008 act, some new section 92, subsection 3, C and D, seemed to give the Secretary of State unlimited flexibility to redefine full-time education without the proper scrutiny of Parliament and I suspect the noble Lady will tell me that this is using the affirmative procedure, but all of us know that that is very restricted scrutiny.
I am very pleased that my noble friend Lord Lucas has raised the issue of unregistered alternative provision, which benefits to be clear, neither from safeguarding nor from educational oversight in his amendment 427. And it is extraordinary, as are the noble Lord's have reflected, that rather like unregulated provision, we take very vulnerable children and young people and put them in unregistered provision without any of the safeguards available. So why agree with him -- so I agree with him that we would have no unregistered provision but at a minimum, I think this also applies to amendment 451, we would have some safeguarding regulation of those settings even if children going there for a short period of time, as always the infamous Dave the car mechanic, where apparently some children spend time, lease there we should have appropriate safeguarding checks.
I am interested what the noble Lady thinks about that. Turning to the amendments in this group in the name of my noble friend Lord Lucas, all of whom have raised issues that can arise for children whose parents choose an educational path that aligns to their religious tradition, and the Minister and the whole House have heard very clearly today both sides of the argument, the concerns, the valid concerns I think, that have been raised by particular faith groups about the impact of the government's legislation on their communities, very eloquently put in particular by the Right Reverend Robert the Bishop of Oxford on the noble Lord who I promise we will still listen to him however much he speaks.
I close by wishing to align myself to my noble friend Baroness Morgan of Cotes, I think we want to retain what I think the noble Lord described as the precious tolerance that many of us including my own family have benefited from, from this country welcoming them. But also, ensuring that the rights of every child are upheld and I hope very much that the noble Baroness the Minister will put her not
**** Possible New Speaker ****
task. First of all, can I say to the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
First of all, can I say to the noble Lady that she is right, those questions were very boring but nonetheless, I am sure important and I will write to the noble Lady to respond to those specific points. respond to those specific points. The rest of the debate however, was not boring but also important and I not boring but also important and I think, I hope I will be able to respond to the wide-ranging of issues that have been raised and the issues that have been raised and the conflicting positions that are part
13:08
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
conflicting positions that are part of what we need to wrestle with in taking this legislation forward. This group of amendments impact on clause 36 of the bill and concern which settings are and are not brought into the system of regulation found in Chapter one of part four of the Education and Skills Act 2008, it might be helpful I think if I first outline The clause contains as I say, the settings regulated by that framework, among other things, regulated settings are required to register with the Secretary of State and to be subject to regular inspection against prescribed standards.
At present, that framework applies to independent schools. Post 36 expands this framework further under this clause, settings will be required to... The secretary of state if they provide full-time education to 5 or more children of compulsory school age or one or more such child's with an EHCP or one that is looked after by a local authority, and this change will bring more settings that provide a full-time education into this well-established and effective regime. Typically, the settings impacted by this change will be those that operate during but not necessarily only during the school day.
And we will produce guidance to help those potentially impacted by this change understand what is expected by them. For understandable reasons, a significant part of this debate has focused around issues of children and I will respond to that but I will reiterate in doing that but I'm afraid the noble Lord is just wrong in suggesting that this is legislation aimed at, this measure is about ensuring that where there is a full-time education for children they will be registered and subject to regular inspections and standards, there has been concern amongst the community and I will respond to that now.
This measure does not suppose an inherent problem with the child being educated, or the quality of home education but it is about ensuring settings provide full-time education to children. On full-time education to children. On the basis of how we define full-time and engagement, as now we intend to produce guidance to assist people in understanding whether the education setting they were needs to register with the Secretary of State and it is likely that this guidance will be similar to our existing approach and therefore the starting point will be that settings operating during the day for more than 18 hours per week will be regulated and I very much doubt in response to the noble lady that she did attend Sunday school for 18 hours per week, in terms of that example.
There is, can I just also emphasise, that in expecting institutions operating for that length of hours to register, there is no requirement. In the independent school standards, in standards akin to those that we will bring forward for these institutions, for a setting to provide a secular education, there is no requirement for them to deliver for example, a curriculum. There is considerable flexibility provided around the curriculum, just to respond to 1 of the points made by the noble Lord.
The standards are well-established, minimum standards which already employ too many registered settings, that do not consider themselves to classically be schools. The regulatory regime gives Ministers flexibility to decide on which standards apply to different types of regulated setting and we will carefully consider options on the standards that will be used to regulate settings and in doing that I can assure noble Lord's, both that there has been considerable engagement with the community up to this point.
I have met with the Liaison Committee and my officials have had ongoing engagement with the community. My former colleague met with the community on these issues and we do undertake to continue that engagement as we clarify the nature of the regulations and the extent of those that will be included within it. But it is right, that full-time educational settings are registered and subject to regular inspection. This will lead to children who currently attend the settings learning in a regulated and safe setting which is subject to regular inspection and for that reason, we believe that clause 36 should form part of the bill and is an important improvement on the current situation, as has been recognised by several noble lords in this debate.
There are several amendments which seek to further change the application of this regulatory framework and I will turn to the details of those now. Both Amendment 4278 and 427C seek to exempt settings which provide religious instruction. The noble Lord, via Amendment 4278 appears to wish any setting which provides any form of religious instruction in addition to education elsewhere, to be exempt from the regime in the 2008 act, and the Right Reverend, in introducing Amendment 40 7C seeks to exempt settings which provide only religious instruction or guidance to children of compulsory school age, provided certain other conditions are met, and can I just say at this point, and agreeing I think with the noble Lady Baroness Morgan, and others, that we are in this country, rightly tolerant of faith education, I remember the arguments that my noble friend had in defending that principle in the time when we served in the previous government and the Department for Education.
We have as a country, and we should be proud of them, many faith schools that operate and, that is a principle supported by subsequent successive governments and of course, in each of those governments we have seen support for the development of faith schools, not only for the protection of those that existed, so I hope that honourable lords believe that this is in some way or another an attack on a ability to deliver religious education either within a school setting or as a freedom for parents as part of their right to home educate their child.
This provision is about full-time education, not about the religious approach of the institution. But accepting therefore, either Amendment, would mean accepting a two tier system where some children receive an education which is potentially less safe and subject to less oversight than their peers, and I think that case was exemplified very clearly by the points made by the noble Lady. Purely because, the educational setting that they attend time, offers religious instruction to a greater or lesser degree. It is an important principle that settings whose hours of operation suggest that they are operating like a school, and providing all-around majority of a child's education majority of a child's education Clause 36 support that principle and although I understand the position of which the amendments are coming, is a 47, eight and 47, C would undermine that principle.
Turning to 47, be in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas which he described as a technical that is an important, I can understand the point about it is an important anti-evasion measure whether concern is to ensure that settings cannot escape regulation by splitting provision across, for example several sites. Let me reassure the noble Lord Lucas and reassure the noble Lord Lucas and the noble Lady Spielman that the offence of operating without registration concerns institutional operating without registration.
So a single setting which is purported to be part-time but was making split provision to avoid registration, for example offering a morning and an afternoon session at different premises would likely be considered a single institution and be required to register. And clause 42 of the bill of course gives Ofsted stronger powers to investigate the complex and complex arrangements such as those. Both men and 47 and 451 concerning the regulation of alternative provision, education provided outside of mainstream or special school.
Amendment 47, in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas seeks to bring all alternative provision into that system of regulation, which supplies at independent schools and 451 in the name of the noble Lord story seeks to prevent the use of local authorities of alternative provision which isn't registered. As I've already stated clause 36 concerns the regulation of full-time sittings, both alternative provision is in many ways a short-term or part-time arrangement. For that reason we do not believe it would be appropriate, or proportionate to apply this system of regulation which applies to independent schools to a non- full-time provider.
That doesn't mean that we don't recognise that there is an issue here. With regard to the noble Lord particular concern expressed in 451 it is already the case that local authorities should not commission alternative provision but has failed to register. Not least because the AU oration of a school is a criminal offence. In relation however to the broader points, including those made by Baroness Spielman. Do recognise concerns about inconsistent oversight of part-time non-school alternative provision and the risks that this poses to vulnerable children and that is why the government published a comprehensive package of reforms, last month to raise the standards across the sector.
These include new voluntary national standards supported by guidance to help local areas contain implementation ahead of future legislation to meet the standards mandatory. Under our plans, local authorities will also play a strengthened role in quality assuring provision against the standards. While schools remain responsible for ensuring placement meet individual needs. I will be more than happy to provide further information about those changes that we identified last month and the future intent there. Finally, in this group, amendment 4 68, tabled by Lord Lucas seeks to require the Secretary of State if requested to declare that an alternative system of education, when carefully followed is expected to constitute a system of suitable education, for most children.
As we have already discussed, at length, during this committee stage, the law is clear, that parents already have an option to educate their child otherwise than at school. That education doesn't need to be suitable to the age, ability, aptitude and any special educational needs that the in the individual child may have. There is no formal criteria of legislation for suitable education beyond this, because each individual assessment must rest on a balance of factors for each child. Identifying whether education is suitable sits best with local authorities, who can make enquiries as to the education of individual children.
Amendment 468 would cut across that principle. It would remove the personalised approach that is inherent in the current system and for that reason I would hope the noble Lord would withdraw it. This group and this debate has concerned the regulation of full-time educational settings. The discussion has touched both on that principle and on the regulation of part-time settings which would be inappropriate to regulate as if they were full-time. I hope that reflecting on the discussion and bearing in mind the considerable discussions and engagement that has already happened and the commitment to continue that engagement, noble Lord will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
... I'm very grateful to the noble Baroness for that extensive reply. Baroness for that extensive reply. To pick up on some of the issues in the debate. I entirely understand the debate. I entirely understand what the noble Baroness... Baroness Blackstone are saying. If children Blackstone are saying. If children are not receiving their entitlement in education, we need to be doing something about that. That is part
At present, that framework applies to independent schools. Post 36 expands this framework further under this clause, settings will be required to... The secretary of state if they provide full-time education to 5 or more children of compulsory school age or one or more such child's with an EHCP or one that is looked after by a local authority, and this change will bring more settings that provide a full-time education into this well-established and effective regime. Typically, the settings impacted by this change will be those that operate during but not necessarily only during the school day.
And we will produce guidance to help those potentially impacted by this change understand what is expected by them. For understandable reasons, a significant part of this debate has focused around issues of children and I will respond to that but I will reiterate in doing that but I'm afraid the noble Lord is just wrong in suggesting that this is legislation aimed at, this measure is about ensuring that where there is a full-time education for children they will be registered and subject to regular inspections and standards, there has been concern amongst the community and I will respond to that now.
This measure does not suppose an inherent problem with the child being educated, or the quality of home education but it is about ensuring settings provide full-time education to children. On full-time education to children. On the basis of how we define full-time and engagement, as now we intend to produce guidance to assist people in understanding whether the education setting they were needs to register with the Secretary of State and it is likely that this guidance will be similar to our existing approach and therefore the starting point will be that settings operating during the day for more than 18 hours per week will be regulated and I very much doubt in response to the noble lady that she did attend Sunday school for 18 hours per week, in terms of that example.
There is, can I just also emphasise, that in expecting institutions operating for that length of hours to register, there is no requirement. In the independent school standards, in standards akin to those that we will bring forward for these institutions, for a setting to provide a secular education, there is no requirement for them to deliver for example, a curriculum. There is considerable flexibility provided around the curriculum, just to respond to 1 of the points made by the noble Lord.
The standards are well-established, minimum standards which already employ too many registered settings, that do not consider themselves to classically be schools. The regulatory regime gives Ministers flexibility to decide on which standards apply to different types of regulated setting and we will carefully consider options on the standards that will be used to regulate settings and in doing that I can assure noble Lord's, both that there has been considerable engagement with the community up to this point.
I have met with the Liaison Committee and my officials have had ongoing engagement with the community. My former colleague met with the community on these issues and we do undertake to continue that engagement as we clarify the nature of the regulations and the extent of those that will be included within it. But it is right, that full-time educational settings are registered and subject to regular inspection. This will lead to children who currently attend the settings learning in a regulated and safe setting which is subject to regular inspection and for that reason, we believe that clause 36 should form part of the bill and is an important improvement on the current situation, as has been recognised by several noble lords in this debate.
There are several amendments which seek to further change the application of this regulatory framework and I will turn to the details of those now. Both Amendment 4278 and 427C seek to exempt settings which provide religious instruction. The noble Lord, via Amendment 4278 appears to wish any setting which provides any form of religious instruction in addition to education elsewhere, to be exempt from the regime in the 2008 act, and the Right Reverend, in introducing Amendment 40 7C seeks to exempt settings which provide only religious instruction or guidance to children of compulsory school age, provided certain other conditions are met, and can I just say at this point, and agreeing I think with the noble Lady Baroness Morgan, and others, that we are in this country, rightly tolerant of faith education, I remember the arguments that my noble friend had in defending that principle in the time when we served in the previous government and the Department for Education.
We have as a country, and we should be proud of them, many faith schools that operate and, that is a principle supported by subsequent successive governments and of course, in each of those governments we have seen support for the development of faith schools, not only for the protection of those that existed, so I hope that honourable lords believe that this is in some way or another an attack on a ability to deliver religious education either within a school setting or as a freedom for parents as part of their right to home educate their child.
This provision is about full-time education, not about the religious approach of the institution. But accepting therefore, either Amendment, would mean accepting a two tier system where some children receive an education which is potentially less safe and subject to less oversight than their peers, and I think that case was exemplified very clearly by the points made by the noble Lady. Purely because, the educational setting that they attend time, offers religious instruction to a greater or lesser degree. It is an important principle that settings whose hours of operation suggest that they are operating like a school, and providing all-around majority of a child's education majority of a child's education Clause 36 support that principle and although I understand the position of which the amendments are coming, is a 47, eight and 47, C would undermine that principle.
Turning to 47, be in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas which he described as a technical that is an important, I can understand the point about it is an important anti-evasion measure whether concern is to ensure that settings cannot escape regulation by splitting provision across, for example several sites. Let me reassure the noble Lord Lucas and reassure the noble Lord Lucas and the noble Lady Spielman that the offence of operating without registration concerns institutional operating without registration.
So a single setting which is purported to be part-time but was making split provision to avoid registration, for example offering a morning and an afternoon session at different premises would likely be considered a single institution and be required to register. And clause 42 of the bill of course gives Ofsted stronger powers to investigate the complex and complex arrangements such as those. Both men and 47 and 451 concerning the regulation of alternative provision, education provided outside of mainstream or special school.
Amendment 47, in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas seeks to bring all alternative provision into that system of regulation, which supplies at independent schools and 451 in the name of the noble Lord story seeks to prevent the use of local authorities of alternative provision which isn't registered. As I've already stated clause 36 concerns the regulation of full-time sittings, both alternative provision is in many ways a short-term or part-time arrangement. For that reason we do not believe it would be appropriate, or proportionate to apply this system of regulation which applies to independent schools to a non- full-time provider.
That doesn't mean that we don't recognise that there is an issue here. With regard to the noble Lord particular concern expressed in 451 it is already the case that local authorities should not commission alternative provision but has failed to register. Not least because the AU oration of a school is a criminal offence. In relation however to the broader points, including those made by Baroness Spielman. Do recognise concerns about inconsistent oversight of part-time non-school alternative provision and the risks that this poses to vulnerable children and that is why the government published a comprehensive package of reforms, last month to raise the standards across the sector.
These include new voluntary national standards supported by guidance to help local areas contain implementation ahead of future legislation to meet the standards mandatory. Under our plans, local authorities will also play a strengthened role in quality assuring provision against the standards. While schools remain responsible for ensuring placement meet individual needs. I will be more than happy to provide further information about those changes that we identified last month and the future intent there. Finally, in this group, amendment 4 68, tabled by Lord Lucas seeks to require the Secretary of State if requested to declare that an alternative system of education, when carefully followed is expected to constitute a system of suitable education, for most children.
As we have already discussed, at length, during this committee stage, the law is clear, that parents already have an option to educate their child otherwise than at school. That education doesn't need to be suitable to the age, ability, aptitude and any special educational needs that the in the individual child may have. There is no formal criteria of legislation for suitable education beyond this, because each individual assessment must rest on a balance of factors for each child. Identifying whether education is suitable sits best with local authorities, who can make enquiries as to the education of individual children.
Amendment 468 would cut across that principle. It would remove the personalised approach that is inherent in the current system and for that reason I would hope the noble Lord would withdraw it. This group and this debate has concerned the regulation of full-time educational settings. The discussion has touched both on that principle and on the regulation of part-time settings which would be inappropriate to regulate as if they were full-time. I hope that reflecting on the discussion and bearing in mind the considerable discussions and engagement that has already happened and the commitment to continue that engagement, noble Lord will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
... I'm very grateful to the noble Baroness for that extensive reply. Baroness for that extensive reply. To pick up on some of the issues in the debate. I entirely understand the debate. I entirely understand what the noble Baroness... Baroness Blackstone are saying. If children Blackstone are saying. If children are not receiving their entitlement in education, we need to be doing something about that. That is part
13:22
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
of the basic contract and I understand it between the state and any education system, a child has a right. For whatever reason it isn't being provided that is not tolerable. But it is surely important for the government to important for the government to indicate, to others what way forward it favours. Is it preferring and I take, I hope I'm not leaping too far ahead, of my understanding where the government wants to save us up is it fair to say that, right, we would like to see them registered at schools, but we will make sure that the regulations that apply do not require them to violate their religious principles, in the way that they teach.
In other words, is the accommodation to be within that element of what we would, might normally require a school to provide education. So that our schools that are allowed to teach in a way that is consistent with the Torah and that is one way. The other way forward is that proposed by the Bishop and myself. I do not recognise the characterisation of the amendments, in the noble Baroness's reply. We are specifically saying that settings should be exempt which do not provide education.
Which only provide religious instruction. In other words a children's education has to happen somewhere else. There has to be another's place, another institution that is providing that education. That is why the religious space is not regarded as a school because there is another space that is regarded as home education, or at school. And if there is somewhere else that is regarded as providing that child's education why should he or she, or whatever, be regarded as a school to, because the function of education in school is being provided elsewhere.
I would firstly really like the noble Baroness as guidance on whether we are looking at some thing that, a structure, the aim is to take the achievers, the school and make it clear child's education is being provided. Whether that is the preferred way forward or whether we are looking at a structure which makes it possible for education that is consistent with the Torah to be provided within the regulated school. I really think we owe this community a clear way we owe this community a clear way forward.
Where do we need to get to, those of us who are there in support of them can say, you need to do this or, let's have a go at the government because they're asking too much. We can have a dialogue on this. We have a blank as to what the government's intentions are. That isn't satisfactory. I really hope the government will find it, if the noble Baroness wants to reply I understand, otherwise be very grateful if you could write to me, to give a clear view of what the government's preferred way forward is on this.
What is that opening offer. What would they like to see, because the bill as it is now is just destroying these communities. That isn't the impression as the noble Baroness said. For now I beg
**** Possible New Speaker ****
leave to withdraw. Is it your Lordships pleasure that the amendment be withdrawn. The amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendments 427, a and B, not moved. In clause 36 amendment 4 27 BA
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Baroness Barran. I'm pleased to introduce the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm pleased to introduce the amendments in my name before we amendments in my name before we start the next group of amendments, I would like to make a couple of I would like to make a couple of points.. The House will have to adjourn before 2 PM, so that they adjourn before 2 PM, so that they can get the chamber ready for Oral can get the chamber ready for Oral Questions. Noble Lord who want to make the Whip very happy if Venables will speak very swiftly, so we can conclude this group of amendments conclude this group of amendments and by 2 PM.
If not I will have to adjourn mid group, because it is quite a huge group and then we will continue after Oral Questions, this
In other words, is the accommodation to be within that element of what we would, might normally require a school to provide education. So that our schools that are allowed to teach in a way that is consistent with the Torah and that is one way. The other way forward is that proposed by the Bishop and myself. I do not recognise the characterisation of the amendments, in the noble Baroness's reply. We are specifically saying that settings should be exempt which do not provide education.
Which only provide religious instruction. In other words a children's education has to happen somewhere else. There has to be another's place, another institution that is providing that education. That is why the religious space is not regarded as a school because there is another space that is regarded as home education, or at school. And if there is somewhere else that is regarded as providing that child's education why should he or she, or whatever, be regarded as a school to, because the function of education in school is being provided elsewhere.
I would firstly really like the noble Baroness as guidance on whether we are looking at some thing that, a structure, the aim is to take the achievers, the school and make it clear child's education is being provided. Whether that is the preferred way forward or whether we are looking at a structure which makes it possible for education that is consistent with the Torah to be provided within the regulated school. I really think we owe this community a clear way we owe this community a clear way forward.
Where do we need to get to, those of us who are there in support of them can say, you need to do this or, let's have a go at the government because they're asking too much. We can have a dialogue on this. We have a blank as to what the government's intentions are. That isn't satisfactory. I really hope the government will find it, if the noble Baroness wants to reply I understand, otherwise be very grateful if you could write to me, to give a clear view of what the government's preferred way forward is on this.
What is that opening offer. What would they like to see, because the bill as it is now is just destroying these communities. That isn't the impression as the noble Baroness said. For now I beg
**** Possible New Speaker ****
leave to withdraw. Is it your Lordships pleasure that the amendment be withdrawn. The amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendments 427, a and B, not moved. In clause 36 amendment 4 27 BA
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Baroness Barran. I'm pleased to introduce the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm pleased to introduce the amendments in my name before we amendments in my name before we start the next group of amendments, I would like to make a couple of I would like to make a couple of points.. The House will have to adjourn before 2 PM, so that they adjourn before 2 PM, so that they can get the chamber ready for Oral can get the chamber ready for Oral Questions. Noble Lord who want to make the Whip very happy if Venables will speak very swiftly, so we can conclude this group of amendments conclude this group of amendments and by 2 PM.
If not I will have to adjourn mid group, because it is quite a huge group and then we will continue after Oral Questions, this
13:28
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
continue after Oral Questions, this afternoon. May I also remind all noble Lords to be brief in their
**** Possible New Speaker ****
comments, in this group. Baroness Barran. Better start with an apology to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Better start with an apology to the Whips because my comments are a little detailed and they are quite little detailed and they are quite detailed amendments. I am still detailed amendments. I am still pleased to introduce them. Again, on these benches we support the aims of this clause to ensure that children this clause to ensure that children learn in a safe and regulated settings and illegal schools by the settings and illegal schools by the register or closedown. Those institutions that do not meet the independent school standards are required to do so in an effective way.
We have two sets of concerns in this area which I will try and set out. Firstly they lie with the apparent Secretary of State to regulate academies in multiple different ways, through the funding agreement, which the Minister, or agreement, which the Minister, or the former Minister, in the other place argued, in committee, in relation to clause 36 was relation to clause 36 was sufficient. Through the new powers of clause 49, which we have yet to debate and now the additional powers in clause 37.
Secondly, there are worries that reflect the details of the revised standards, when we set out regulations. Effectively independent schools are flying blind as to what these new obligations will be. Under section 94 of the 2008 Energy Act, the Secretary of State was authorised to make regulations describing standards in relation to specific matters. These regulations have always been bound proprietors of academies, as they are independent schools. Clause 36 of the bill introduces additional subsections in a section 94 of the 2008 Energy Act and these include a standard by reference to, whether or not the parameter of an independent education institution has regard to guidance issued a document published, by the Secretary of State, from time to time ,.".
Until we see the regulations that are proposed to be published in relation to that standard, we cannot see what the consequence of this change would be. So could the noble Baroness at the Minister clarify what if any new obligations as distinct from have obligations as distinct from have regard to in new guidance by the DfEE. It would be helpful if the government could be clear about the changes in the burdens on the proprietors of academies from what currently exists.
My amendment 4 29A removes these types of schools from removes these types of schools from Section 94 is proposed to be amended in relation to a proprietor which is a body of persons. It is not entirely clear what that expression is intended to mean. Academies trust and therefore single person body of persons that is possible therefore that the proposed amendment to the 2008 act is irrelevant to academy schools and if so, can the noble Baroness the Minister confirm this.
But the bill also includes the following wording, and I quote, a standard in relation to proprietor may be prescribed by reference in the case of a proprietor which is a body of persons to whether the Secretary of State is notified before a new person becomes involved in the general control and management of or assumes legal responsibility and accountability for the proprietor ,". It could be said that the members of the company limited by guarantee and or, its directors or persons who become involved in the general control and management of will assume legal response ability and accountability for the company limited by guarantee, namely the proprietor of the Academy school.
I did not draft the bill, I appreciate it is dense. One could argue that it is not applicable because the proprietor of an Academy school is not a body of persons, but it is important that we understand how the government thinks this should be interpreted and I hope the noble Baroness can cover this when she comes to close. My Amendment 48 removes academies from the scope of the amendments to section 118 of the 2008 Education and Skills Act. Under the new section 11 118 a, proposed to be introduced by the bill, I quote, the Secretary of State may suspend the registration of an independent educational institution if the Secretary of State is satisfied that one or more of the independent educational institutions standards are not being met, and the Secretary of State has reasonable cause to believe that as a result one or more students of the institution will may be exposed to the risk of harm.
So my Amendment 4 to 8 seeks to confirm what we already know, mainly that the funding agreement gives the Secretary of State all the powers she needs to regulate academies. And I thought it was worth refreshing my memory and what it included in the last funding agreement, and it covers governance, the running of academies, finance and accounting, complaints, and termination among many other things. So I would have thought that would be sufficient for any Secretary of State. But as the noble Baroness the Minister knows, the concept of suspending the registration of a proprietor of an Academy is fraught with difficulty.
The funding agreement contains complex provisions relating to the termination of such an agreement. Our concern is that the practicalities involved in suspending the registration of an Academy proprietor, thus making it unlawful for the proprietor to continue to operate academies are unworkable. We believe these provisions should not apply to an Academy school but that the Secretary of State should rely on the provision in the funding agreements which give her ample powers of intervention. So it would be helpful if the noble Baroness the Minister could confirm that she agrees with me.
Turning to the other amendments in my name in this group, I would be grateful if the Minister could explain to the House why the list of accepted institution set out in clause 36 does not include academies including free schools of course, does not include studio schools, given that the list does include 16 to 19 academies. I understand that they are directly accountable to the Secretary of State via the funding agreement but surely this is the case for 16 to 19 academies, too.
My Amendment 427 BA mirrors that put down by my honourable friend, which the Minister and the other place committed to addressing and writing but we have not been able to find his response. It would be helpful if the Minister could clarify this. At the risk of being repetitive, can the Minister explain what the problem is that the government is trying to solve in relation to academies with this clause. In case the government has not already thought this through and quantified it, I have put down amendments 431 a and 50 60 which would require the Secretary of State to publish a report on the impact of the educational institutions standards on schools of different types that are not maintained by the local authority before commencement of these changes.
And finally, my amendments 432BN43 IIIa relate to clause 39, subsection 2G which relates to the definition of a material change. Our concern is that there could be a simple change of use of a building or an addition of say, a bike shed which would be for student use which would need to be notified to the Secretary of State and again, can the noble Baroness the Minister explain if this applies to academies or only to feepaying schools. The former Minister in the other place when responding to my honourable friend on this point appeared to say it was the latter but I am not clear where this is made clear in the legislation itself.
Clause 39 links as I understand it, to clause 36 and academies are not accepted institutions unless of course the government sees the light and accepts my earlier amendment. So I had understood that they would be caught by this clause. Secondly, the Minister and the other place argued that one could not be sure that the new building of a private school was suitable for students. If this is the case, why does the government think that the school would be more likely to respect this legislation than that that already exists around health and safety and building regulations and I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed, page 80, line 18, leave out line 18 and insert the 18, leave out line 18 and insert the words as printed on the Marshall list.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
list. Amendment 432 4328 and 434 in my
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment 432 4328 and 434 in my name can to -- concern enforcement name can to -- concern enforcement provisions, these are critical in this Bill which seeks to address the harm caused by unregistered harm caused by unregistered educational settings. Let me begin by referring to the experience of a woman, a mother in Stamford Hill.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
comments, in this group. Baroness Barran. Better start with an apology to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Better start with an apology to the Whips because my comments are a little detailed and they are quite little detailed and they are quite detailed amendments. I am still detailed amendments. I am still pleased to introduce them. Again, on these benches we support the aims of this clause to ensure that children this clause to ensure that children learn in a safe and regulated settings and illegal schools by the settings and illegal schools by the register or closedown. Those institutions that do not meet the independent school standards are required to do so in an effective way.
We have two sets of concerns in this area which I will try and set out. Firstly they lie with the apparent Secretary of State to regulate academies in multiple different ways, through the funding agreement, which the Minister, or agreement, which the Minister, or the former Minister, in the other place argued, in committee, in relation to clause 36 was relation to clause 36 was sufficient. Through the new powers of clause 49, which we have yet to debate and now the additional powers in clause 37.
Secondly, there are worries that reflect the details of the revised standards, when we set out regulations. Effectively independent schools are flying blind as to what these new obligations will be. Under section 94 of the 2008 Energy Act, the Secretary of State was authorised to make regulations describing standards in relation to specific matters. These regulations have always been bound proprietors of academies, as they are independent schools. Clause 36 of the bill introduces additional subsections in a section 94 of the 2008 Energy Act and these include a standard by reference to, whether or not the parameter of an independent education institution has regard to guidance issued a document published, by the Secretary of State, from time to time ,.".
Until we see the regulations that are proposed to be published in relation to that standard, we cannot see what the consequence of this change would be. So could the noble Baroness at the Minister clarify what if any new obligations as distinct from have obligations as distinct from have regard to in new guidance by the DfEE. It would be helpful if the government could be clear about the changes in the burdens on the proprietors of academies from what currently exists.
My amendment 4 29A removes these types of schools from removes these types of schools from Section 94 is proposed to be amended in relation to a proprietor which is a body of persons. It is not entirely clear what that expression is intended to mean. Academies trust and therefore single person body of persons that is possible therefore that the proposed amendment to the 2008 act is irrelevant to academy schools and if so, can the noble Baroness the Minister confirm this.
But the bill also includes the following wording, and I quote, a standard in relation to proprietor may be prescribed by reference in the case of a proprietor which is a body of persons to whether the Secretary of State is notified before a new person becomes involved in the general control and management of or assumes legal responsibility and accountability for the proprietor ,". It could be said that the members of the company limited by guarantee and or, its directors or persons who become involved in the general control and management of will assume legal response ability and accountability for the company limited by guarantee, namely the proprietor of the Academy school.
I did not draft the bill, I appreciate it is dense. One could argue that it is not applicable because the proprietor of an Academy school is not a body of persons, but it is important that we understand how the government thinks this should be interpreted and I hope the noble Baroness can cover this when she comes to close. My Amendment 48 removes academies from the scope of the amendments to section 118 of the 2008 Education and Skills Act. Under the new section 11 118 a, proposed to be introduced by the bill, I quote, the Secretary of State may suspend the registration of an independent educational institution if the Secretary of State is satisfied that one or more of the independent educational institutions standards are not being met, and the Secretary of State has reasonable cause to believe that as a result one or more students of the institution will may be exposed to the risk of harm.
So my Amendment 4 to 8 seeks to confirm what we already know, mainly that the funding agreement gives the Secretary of State all the powers she needs to regulate academies. And I thought it was worth refreshing my memory and what it included in the last funding agreement, and it covers governance, the running of academies, finance and accounting, complaints, and termination among many other things. So I would have thought that would be sufficient for any Secretary of State. But as the noble Baroness the Minister knows, the concept of suspending the registration of a proprietor of an Academy is fraught with difficulty.
The funding agreement contains complex provisions relating to the termination of such an agreement. Our concern is that the practicalities involved in suspending the registration of an Academy proprietor, thus making it unlawful for the proprietor to continue to operate academies are unworkable. We believe these provisions should not apply to an Academy school but that the Secretary of State should rely on the provision in the funding agreements which give her ample powers of intervention. So it would be helpful if the noble Baroness the Minister could confirm that she agrees with me.
Turning to the other amendments in my name in this group, I would be grateful if the Minister could explain to the House why the list of accepted institution set out in clause 36 does not include academies including free schools of course, does not include studio schools, given that the list does include 16 to 19 academies. I understand that they are directly accountable to the Secretary of State via the funding agreement but surely this is the case for 16 to 19 academies, too.
My Amendment 427 BA mirrors that put down by my honourable friend, which the Minister and the other place committed to addressing and writing but we have not been able to find his response. It would be helpful if the Minister could clarify this. At the risk of being repetitive, can the Minister explain what the problem is that the government is trying to solve in relation to academies with this clause. In case the government has not already thought this through and quantified it, I have put down amendments 431 a and 50 60 which would require the Secretary of State to publish a report on the impact of the educational institutions standards on schools of different types that are not maintained by the local authority before commencement of these changes.
And finally, my amendments 432BN43 IIIa relate to clause 39, subsection 2G which relates to the definition of a material change. Our concern is that there could be a simple change of use of a building or an addition of say, a bike shed which would be for student use which would need to be notified to the Secretary of State and again, can the noble Baroness the Minister explain if this applies to academies or only to feepaying schools. The former Minister in the other place when responding to my honourable friend on this point appeared to say it was the latter but I am not clear where this is made clear in the legislation itself.
Clause 39 links as I understand it, to clause 36 and academies are not accepted institutions unless of course the government sees the light and accepts my earlier amendment. So I had understood that they would be caught by this clause. Secondly, the Minister and the other place argued that one could not be sure that the new building of a private school was suitable for students. If this is the case, why does the government think that the school would be more likely to respect this legislation than that that already exists around health and safety and building regulations and I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed, page 80, line 18, leave out line 18 and insert the 18, leave out line 18 and insert the words as printed on the Marshall list.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
list. Amendment 432 4328 and 434 in my
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment 432 4328 and 434 in my name can to -- concern enforcement name can to -- concern enforcement provisions, these are critical in this Bill which seeks to address the harm caused by unregistered harm caused by unregistered educational settings. Let me begin by referring to the experience of a woman, a mother in Stamford Hill.
13:38
Baroness Blackstone (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Blackstone (Labour)
She received a broad and balanced education within her school and she wants the same for her son but boys are expected to be protected from secular education and she found herself with no choice but to send her son to an unregistered educational establishment. The curriculum he studied was exclusively religious, with no provision at all for any subjects including important subjects such as English and mathematics. This was not parental choice in any meaningful sense, it was the result of communal pressure within a context that often leaves families with no real alternative.
These are the institutions close 36 rightly seeks to bring within the scope of regulation. I accept that there are parents who genuinely do choose to send their sons here but let's be clear the as our schools by any functional definition and this bill makes the necessary statutory clarification to ensure that they are treated as such for regulatory purposes. Once within the scope of regulation, they will be a viable option for parents who wish to make use of their services. However, boys in these environments often attend for very long hours including Sundays, a secular education can be delivered on evenings and weekends in the home, in almost every case entirely implausible so there is no adequate home education for boys who are attending these institutions, often from 730 in the morning until late in the evening and on Sundays.
We offered to visit but the offer was rejected so there is no transparency in this respect. We have met young men who attend such places and we were struck by their resilience but also deeply saddened by the obstacles they faced in assessing the education -- accessing education that was denied them in childhood and we are disappointed that the noble Baroness was so disparaging about the comments that they might have made. These were genuine and they were deeply concerned.
What is important to note is that these young people do not wish to abandon their religion or community, but they do seek to live full lives as both observing deuce and as citizens and this is a goal that we in this House should affirm and respect and support. They also raised, I may say, serious safeguarding issues in respect, in relation to the excessive use of corporal punishment. We should be concerned about that, too. My Lords, the bill adopts a two pronged strategy, first clause 31 introduces a home education register to provide transparency and ensure that those genuinely providing home education are able to continue to do so and clause 32 strengthens school attendance orders where that education is not genuinely being delivered.
Secondly, clause 36 enables regulatory oversight of independent institutions operating outside of the law. Our amendments strengthen the enforcement mechanisms required to make these provisioned -- provisions truly effective. These provisions are not about targeting responsible home educators they are about ensuring that no child, whatever their background, falls through the cracks and unfortunately, these boys are falling through the cracks. Let me turn to the amendments themselves. The first amendment, for 3 to a -- the operation of an unregistered educational institution and creates a further offence for assisting or encouraging such activity in any other manner.
This is a proportionate response to a practical challenge. In many cases it is not immediately clear who owns or operates these institutions but it is clear who owns the buildings. This amendment aims to create a disincentive to any individual or organisation from profiting from unlawful activity that places children at risk either directly or indirectly. The second amendment 434, grants the power to search premises without a warrant during investigations into suspected illegal schools. This is a necessary power to prevent disguise compliance and unable safeguarding action, and unable safeguarding action, delay can perpetuate harm.
The enforcement provisions are not about criminalising communities, they are about upholding our collective duty to protect the rights of children to a safe and adequate education irrespective of cultural or religious contexts. I must say here, but I greatly agree with everything the noble Baroness said in her speech in the earlier amendment and I greatly agree with what the Baroness said. I acknowledge the important intervention as the noble Lord referenced in article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, it is indeed vital to uphold the right of parents to educate their children in line with their beliefs but that right is not absolute and that is what we must all accept.
It must be balanced with the state's duty to ensure that every child receives an education that meets minimum standards of safety and quality. That duty is enforced by the UN Convention on the rights of a child. This bill does not constrain religious practice, many children already attend registered schools where they receive both religious and secular education and they are frequently with it -- within the sector. This may be relevant to the questions that the noble Lord asked earlier.
And at second reading, it was said no cultural or religious norms should be permitted to override the fundamental rights of children. I thank all of those members of your Lordships House who engaged on this issue with considerable care and conviction. But I urge the Minister to consider these amendments seriously. They seek not only to ensure that all children in this country without education, they seek only to ensure that all children in this country without exception can access
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I apologise to Baroness Blackstone for seeking to speak before she outlined her very
These are the institutions close 36 rightly seeks to bring within the scope of regulation. I accept that there are parents who genuinely do choose to send their sons here but let's be clear the as our schools by any functional definition and this bill makes the necessary statutory clarification to ensure that they are treated as such for regulatory purposes. Once within the scope of regulation, they will be a viable option for parents who wish to make use of their services. However, boys in these environments often attend for very long hours including Sundays, a secular education can be delivered on evenings and weekends in the home, in almost every case entirely implausible so there is no adequate home education for boys who are attending these institutions, often from 730 in the morning until late in the evening and on Sundays.
We offered to visit but the offer was rejected so there is no transparency in this respect. We have met young men who attend such places and we were struck by their resilience but also deeply saddened by the obstacles they faced in assessing the education -- accessing education that was denied them in childhood and we are disappointed that the noble Baroness was so disparaging about the comments that they might have made. These were genuine and they were deeply concerned.
What is important to note is that these young people do not wish to abandon their religion or community, but they do seek to live full lives as both observing deuce and as citizens and this is a goal that we in this House should affirm and respect and support. They also raised, I may say, serious safeguarding issues in respect, in relation to the excessive use of corporal punishment. We should be concerned about that, too. My Lords, the bill adopts a two pronged strategy, first clause 31 introduces a home education register to provide transparency and ensure that those genuinely providing home education are able to continue to do so and clause 32 strengthens school attendance orders where that education is not genuinely being delivered.
Secondly, clause 36 enables regulatory oversight of independent institutions operating outside of the law. Our amendments strengthen the enforcement mechanisms required to make these provisioned -- provisions truly effective. These provisions are not about targeting responsible home educators they are about ensuring that no child, whatever their background, falls through the cracks and unfortunately, these boys are falling through the cracks. Let me turn to the amendments themselves. The first amendment, for 3 to a -- the operation of an unregistered educational institution and creates a further offence for assisting or encouraging such activity in any other manner.
This is a proportionate response to a practical challenge. In many cases it is not immediately clear who owns or operates these institutions but it is clear who owns the buildings. This amendment aims to create a disincentive to any individual or organisation from profiting from unlawful activity that places children at risk either directly or indirectly. The second amendment 434, grants the power to search premises without a warrant during investigations into suspected illegal schools. This is a necessary power to prevent disguise compliance and unable safeguarding action, and unable safeguarding action, delay can perpetuate harm.
The enforcement provisions are not about criminalising communities, they are about upholding our collective duty to protect the rights of children to a safe and adequate education irrespective of cultural or religious contexts. I must say here, but I greatly agree with everything the noble Baroness said in her speech in the earlier amendment and I greatly agree with what the Baroness said. I acknowledge the important intervention as the noble Lord referenced in article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, it is indeed vital to uphold the right of parents to educate their children in line with their beliefs but that right is not absolute and that is what we must all accept.
It must be balanced with the state's duty to ensure that every child receives an education that meets minimum standards of safety and quality. That duty is enforced by the UN Convention on the rights of a child. This bill does not constrain religious practice, many children already attend registered schools where they receive both religious and secular education and they are frequently with it -- within the sector. This may be relevant to the questions that the noble Lord asked earlier.
And at second reading, it was said no cultural or religious norms should be permitted to override the fundamental rights of children. I thank all of those members of your Lordships House who engaged on this issue with considerable care and conviction. But I urge the Minister to consider these amendments seriously. They seek not only to ensure that all children in this country without education, they seek only to ensure that all children in this country without exception can access
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I apologise to Baroness Blackstone for seeking to speak before she outlined her very
13:46
Lord Lexden (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Lexden (Conservative)
important amendments. Mine are different and narrow in scope. I refer to amendments 4 to 9 and four through three. Relating to independent schools which I brought forward in a close association of noble friend, a strong champion of independent schools, as I am to. I declare my interest as a former general secretary of the Independent Schools Council which gives expression at national level for its one its 1423 member schools there are around 80% of pupils in the present sector educated with a double interest declared since I'm the current President of the independent schools Association and the constituent bodies which has eight members, many small in size and cherished by the local communities they serve so well.
By making provision for a wide range of special needs. It is no secret that independent schools have the differences, deep differences with the current government. Principally because of the imposition of VAT on school fees. I am very glad to say that this bill does not arouse deep anxiety and there is no clash fundamentally opposed principles as over VAT. My two amendments seek to explore the possibilities of adjusting and modifying the government's proposals in a number of respects, rather than taking a serious issue with them.
I might add that the points in question, the subject of careful discussion allegedly between education department officials and senior staff of the Independent Schools Council. The essential aim of my probing amendments is to secure, on the public record a firm indication of the government's response to issues that have been raised in those discussions, without seeking to contest the broad policy. And 49 for example except that the Secretary of State should have power and require independent schools to have regard, a phrase used in the bill for guidance issued from time to time by the Department for Education.
That is entirely appropriate and to give a short example that all children have equal safeguarding detection in equal education and a moral and cultural development. Such areas, it is reasonable for the Secretary of State to police duties and independent schools, by way of guidance. Would it also not, would it not also be appropriate to ensure that the Secretary of State would not seek to limit a schools dependence. In the words of the amendment in respect of missions, the curriculum or examinations.
The vital three, three vital components. Components in education, such qualifications specify the amendment. It would surely and it would not surely be unreasonable to expect that the Secretary of State prescribes new standard that dependent schools must meet would lay before Parliament the statements of asserting that those three vital components of independence would not be compromised. A similar statement would be when a subsequent guidance is issued. The bill, as it stands, provides of any new standard which independent schools would be required to adhere is subject to parliamentary scrutiny.
There are guidance issued under the standard that would be illegally binding, without any defined role. My amendment would give Parliament a role. In this in both houses would be able to bring forward emotions about individual documents and pieces of guidance, if they wish to do so. Effective power for Ministers needs to be balanced by effective protection of the independent schools. Above all, no future government should be able to limit their operational dependence by expanding the purposes, which guidance can be used.
That is what amendment and 429 will achieve. And at 443 graces a single specific problem that independent special schools frequently counter. 128 such schools, within the membership of the Independent Schools Council and another 600 which are not council members. Children admitted to these schools, to receive support for one or more special needs are often found to have other needs as well. The point of which my other friend Baroness Barran has touch. The child admitted to a school specialising in dyslexia, for example may have problems trying to read as part of a wider disorder, such as ADHD.
Under the bill, a special school which response to the circumstances, by making provision for additional needle needs be required to make what is known as material change application. It is that that might, to which my noble friend the Baroness Barran made a specific solution. The trouble is that under clause 39, such applications need to be made before action is taken to meet a child's extra needs. This is obviously impractical. The school deeply concerned... Make immediate arrangements.
Amendment 4 hundred and 43 will provide a simple amendment to set at risk the concerns of schools which find themselves in the circumstances and that they will be in breach of the law. The amendment gives schools to academics terms to make material change application. It is a common sense proposal which I hope the government will consider. Plainly some change to the bill will seem to be needed to avoid a different independent on independent and this misunderstanding perhaps, this gives the impression that the school only need to make an application for material change if it wishes to alter its main purpose.
Explanatory Notes currently referred to schools specially organised make special education provision. Does this mean independent special schools would only need to make a material change application if it changes the SEN D provision. It is specially organised to make. Perhaps the Minister would clarify this point when she responds to the issue, the issues which my two probing amendments raise.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Briefly, I added my name is 2432,
By making provision for a wide range of special needs. It is no secret that independent schools have the differences, deep differences with the current government. Principally because of the imposition of VAT on school fees. I am very glad to say that this bill does not arouse deep anxiety and there is no clash fundamentally opposed principles as over VAT. My two amendments seek to explore the possibilities of adjusting and modifying the government's proposals in a number of respects, rather than taking a serious issue with them.
I might add that the points in question, the subject of careful discussion allegedly between education department officials and senior staff of the Independent Schools Council. The essential aim of my probing amendments is to secure, on the public record a firm indication of the government's response to issues that have been raised in those discussions, without seeking to contest the broad policy. And 49 for example except that the Secretary of State should have power and require independent schools to have regard, a phrase used in the bill for guidance issued from time to time by the Department for Education.
That is entirely appropriate and to give a short example that all children have equal safeguarding detection in equal education and a moral and cultural development. Such areas, it is reasonable for the Secretary of State to police duties and independent schools, by way of guidance. Would it also not, would it not also be appropriate to ensure that the Secretary of State would not seek to limit a schools dependence. In the words of the amendment in respect of missions, the curriculum or examinations.
The vital three, three vital components. Components in education, such qualifications specify the amendment. It would surely and it would not surely be unreasonable to expect that the Secretary of State prescribes new standard that dependent schools must meet would lay before Parliament the statements of asserting that those three vital components of independence would not be compromised. A similar statement would be when a subsequent guidance is issued. The bill, as it stands, provides of any new standard which independent schools would be required to adhere is subject to parliamentary scrutiny.
There are guidance issued under the standard that would be illegally binding, without any defined role. My amendment would give Parliament a role. In this in both houses would be able to bring forward emotions about individual documents and pieces of guidance, if they wish to do so. Effective power for Ministers needs to be balanced by effective protection of the independent schools. Above all, no future government should be able to limit their operational dependence by expanding the purposes, which guidance can be used.
That is what amendment and 429 will achieve. And at 443 graces a single specific problem that independent special schools frequently counter. 128 such schools, within the membership of the Independent Schools Council and another 600 which are not council members. Children admitted to these schools, to receive support for one or more special needs are often found to have other needs as well. The point of which my other friend Baroness Barran has touch. The child admitted to a school specialising in dyslexia, for example may have problems trying to read as part of a wider disorder, such as ADHD.
Under the bill, a special school which response to the circumstances, by making provision for additional needle needs be required to make what is known as material change application. It is that that might, to which my noble friend the Baroness Barran made a specific solution. The trouble is that under clause 39, such applications need to be made before action is taken to meet a child's extra needs. This is obviously impractical. The school deeply concerned... Make immediate arrangements.
Amendment 4 hundred and 43 will provide a simple amendment to set at risk the concerns of schools which find themselves in the circumstances and that they will be in breach of the law. The amendment gives schools to academics terms to make material change application. It is a common sense proposal which I hope the government will consider. Plainly some change to the bill will seem to be needed to avoid a different independent on independent and this misunderstanding perhaps, this gives the impression that the school only need to make an application for material change if it wishes to alter its main purpose.
Explanatory Notes currently referred to schools specially organised make special education provision. Does this mean independent special schools would only need to make a material change application if it changes the SEN D provision. It is specially organised to make. Perhaps the Minister would clarify this point when she responds to the issue, the issues which my two probing amendments raise.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Briefly, I added my name is 2432,
13:53
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Briefly, I added my name is 2432, a and 434, given that I spoke on this in the previous group of the members. I do not wish to rehearse members. I do not wish to rehearse that. Linking to what Baroness Lister film and said, in her contribution to the previous debate. I think she described a situation where people aren't cooperating with Ofsted and the Inspectorate to make sure that unregulated body of schools can be regulated. For 3 to a really as Baroness Blackstone said, it means that actually it can be taken about people without the building, that is clear, rather than people who run the building.
You can see how that could be evaded. The Second Amendment gives Ofsted the power to search the premises when they go along, rather than being sent away and have to presumably get
**** Possible New Speaker ****
a warrant and be able to go back and look around. I very much support those amendments and attack them on to the previous debate. This is approaching almost 2
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Briefly, I added my name is 2432, a and 434, given that I spoke on this in the previous group of the members. I do not wish to rehearse members. I do not wish to rehearse that. Linking to what Baroness Lister film and said, in her contribution to the previous debate. I think she described a situation where people aren't cooperating with Ofsted and the Inspectorate to make sure that unregulated body of schools can be regulated. For 3 to a really as Baroness Blackstone said, it means that actually it can be taken about people without the building, that is clear, rather than people who run the building.
You can see how that could be evaded. The Second Amendment gives Ofsted the power to search the premises when they go along, rather than being sent away and have to presumably get
**** Possible New Speaker ****
a warrant and be able to go back and look around. I very much support those amendments and attack them on to the previous debate. This is approaching almost 2
13:54
Lord Leong (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This is approaching almost 2 o'clock. Unless the next Speaker- finish their contribution by 2 o'clock. I suggest we now take a short break to allow the House to prepare the questions, whilst unusual, I beg to me that the debate on this amendment are to be adjourned and we will return to it after Oral Questions. I beg to me
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that the House be resumed. The question is that the House be resumed. As many as are of that resumed. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
contents have it. I beg to move move that the House
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg to move move that the House
**** Possible New Speaker ****
be adjourned, during pleasure, until 3 PM. The question is that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 3 PM. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary,
Lord Leong (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This is approaching almost 2 o'clock. Unless the next Speaker- finish their contribution by 2 o'clock. I suggest we now take a short break to allow the House to prepare the questions, whilst unusual, I beg to me that the debate on this amendment are to be adjourned and we will return to it after Oral Questions. I beg to me
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that the House be resumed. The question is that the House be resumed. As many as are of that resumed. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
contents have it. I beg to move move that the House
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg to move move that the House
**** Possible New Speaker ****
be adjourned, during pleasure, until 3 PM. The question is that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 3 PM. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary,
15:01
15:01
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
The timing delivery of nuclear projects, including duplication and efficiencies in environmental and planning assessments, the government welcomes the interim findings and will continue to work with regulators to understand the opportunities to streamline the regulation of nuclear projects whilst upholding high security and safety standards. We are already taking steps to update the UK's planning framework and aim to designate a new draft national policy statement on nuclear energy generation called EN seven before the end of 2025. The task force's final recommendation we publish in autumn 2025 and the government will respond in due course.
15:02
Lord Spellar (Labour)
-
-
Lord Spellar (Labour)
I thank him for that answer and welcome him to his new role. As he will know from defence, how we have been producing small nuclear reactors for over half a century and we were world leaders in nuclear energy. Fortunately the government have now made a decision on small modular reactors, in spite of years of dither and delay by both governments. We cannot permit further regulatory delay to progress as he is identified, that is clearly the message of the Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce, but can he be much more specific about when they are actually going to get on with it and in due course is insufficient.
15:02
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
I should've read the question I read out a bit more carefully. I thought I read it in due course. The serious point is to say to my noble friend, the report outlines the fact that recommendations are needed. Those recommendations will be in autumn 2025. The government are already discussing across government how they should respond to that. There will be a task force, there will be a cross government working to ensure that the report is not just something we all read and agree with, but we read and actually take action from.
It is our desire to come forward with concrete steps, we will bring those forward and my noble friend will be able to see those for himself. Speed is of the essence.
It is our desire to come forward with concrete steps, we will bring those forward and my noble friend will be able to see those for himself. Speed is of the essence.
15:03
Lord Wigley (Plaid Cymru)
-
-
Lord Wigley (Plaid Cymru)
The Minister will be aware that the main finding of the interim report is the need for a firm steer from the government to establish a strategy for nuclear safety because the current policy does not address a strategic direction on safety management. As the report recommends, an immediate start on this so as to publish a consultation paper alongside the task force's final report, will the Minister commit today to such a timetable?
15:04
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
We are going to do everything, as I said, as speedily as possible. We're going to move forward with respect to this. Let me just say, safety is of paramount importance, of course it is. There can't be any compromise with that, but we have to get on with this. Let me just say, in the mid-1990s, 25% of our electricity was generated through nuclear. It is now 15% and even with the new power stations that have been agreed, unless we do more, it will go down and come back to that.
That's not good enough, we have to do better. With a small modular reactors that my noble friend has been talking about, with the new power station recently agreed by Ed Miliband, there can't be any compromise on safety, but neither can there be the situation where time after time decision are delayed, nothing happens and the consequence of that is our economy suffers and jobs are lost. That's not good enough, we are going to do something about it.
That's not good enough, we have to do better. With a small modular reactors that my noble friend has been talking about, with the new power station recently agreed by Ed Miliband, there can't be any compromise on safety, but neither can there be the situation where time after time decision are delayed, nothing happens and the consequence of that is our economy suffers and jobs are lost. That's not good enough, we are going to do something about it.
15:05
15:05
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
I agree up to a point with what he has said. I think big power stations like size well and Hank Lacy are part of the answer -- Hinckley see. The small modular reactors are necessary. We also have three that have gone through the generic design assessment. There are two additional GDA requesting parties that have met the threshold to enter this and there are others at other stages, so he is quite right to point out the need for modular reactors.
They can be done quickly and sooner and they are part of the answer to our energy needs, but nuclear has to be a part of that and small modular reactors will be a part of it alongside the big part of it alongside the big stations like size well and Hinckley. Hinckley.
They can be done quickly and sooner and they are part of the answer to our energy needs, but nuclear has to be a part of that and small modular reactors will be a part of it alongside the big part of it alongside the big stations like size well and Hinckley. Hinckley.
15:06
Lord Ravensdale (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Ravensdale (Crossbench)
The report rightly mentions the planning system, environments and regulations as the noble Lord the Minister said as a barrier to the nuclear rollout. Of course we have a legislative vehicle for any changes going through your Lordships House at the moment in the form of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. With the Minister say what plans the government has to join the dots between those two things and ensure we take the opportunity with that bill to ensure it delivers on some of those recommendations.
If we have to wait for a future planning bill to come through, we can't afford that time. that time.
If we have to wait for a future planning bill to come through, we can't afford that time. that time.
15:07
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
The government is responding to that request.We did to legislate to the planning bill, there is a thing called EN six which was the current framework within which these decisions were made which listed A's site, these are the designated sites for that nuclear application to be made. EN seven which I mentioned, will be published, the draft by the end of the year and soon be put into place. That will change those planning regulations to ensure that any site can be used to apply for a nuclear designation.
It will have to go to the planning process, it will have to be subject to all of the safety regulations, but it will open up the number of sites where people who want to have small modular reactors or other type of nuclear provision can apply to sites when at the moment they are excluded from doing.
It will have to go to the planning process, it will have to be subject to all of the safety regulations, but it will open up the number of sites where people who want to have small modular reactors or other type of nuclear provision can apply to sites when at the moment they are excluded from doing.
15:08
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour)
With my noble friend come back to the point raised by Lord Howell about SMRs opposed to major gigawatt developments. Would he accept that we need both and that Lord Howell is quite wrong in his criticism of Sizewell C. It's going to supply six% of our electricity generation. A lot of the risks are going to be ironed out. We should be giving our support to this fantastic development. development.
15:08
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
As I said in answer to Lord Howell, of course it requires the big nuclear power stations like Sizewell C and Hinckley C. Which is clearly part of the answer to providing our energy needs through nuclear. Alongside that, of course we need small modular reactors. They can be put in place quicker and be a part of the contribution to ensuring we can meet our energy needs. The numbers I gave out with Rolls-Royce and the work they are doing, GE, Hitachi and a number of others, a lot of them are trying to take this forward and they are part of the answer as well as these fixations.
answer as well as these fixations.
answer as well as these fixations.
15:09
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Conservative)
I welcome this report, and highlights the needs for international collaboration to standardise and harmonise industry and are you literary approaches. The cost and time delays of which can be terminal to many innovative nuclear technologies and projects. We speak about SMR, but we should not forget the new interesting AMR technologies coming soon. It's imperative the UK lead this vast effort given the power demands of tech companies who want to work with the UK. Who from the government will lead the charge alongside our excellent chief inspector, so that vendors have that she -- trust and confidence they need to invest in projects?
15:10
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
It will be led by the government. The government believes in nuclear, the government believes in international collaboration and the secretary of state along with others will be a whole government response will stop we welcome your -- the support from the opposition and support from across his house in Parliament. It will be what we do nationally, but it will also be the international collaboration as well. I thank her for raising that because together we can sort out this energy problem, we can deliver it more quickly and ensure our planning process supports delivery of the needs we have for energy and were sometimes it gets in the way.
15:11
Earl Russell (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Earl Russell (Liberal Democrat)
Does the Minister agree with me that if the government wants a renaissance of nuclear power, it also must take more measures to deal with the historical legacy of nuclear waste. Can I ask the government what plans they have to address the problem now that the Treasury has described a plan for geological deposit facility is unworkable.
15:11
15:11
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
I beg leave to ask the question standing in my name on the Order
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Paper. The government will publish a strategy in the autumn to deliver measures to tackle the structural measures to tackle the structural and root causes of child poverty. As a significant down payment ahead of strategy publication, we have strategy publication, we have already taken substantive action across major drivers of child poverty. This includes an expansion poverty. This includes an expansion of free school meals, a 39 billion pound investment in social and affordable housing and a commitment
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Paper. The government will publish a strategy in the autumn to deliver measures to tackle the structural measures to tackle the structural and root causes of child poverty. As a significant down payment ahead of strategy publication, we have strategy publication, we have already taken substantive action across major drivers of child poverty. This includes an expansion poverty. This includes an expansion of free school meals, a 39 billion pound investment in social and affordable housing and a commitment
15:12
Lord Liddle (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
affordable housing and a commitment to rollout best start family hubs in every local authority. I welcome what the Minister has
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I welcome what the Minister has said about producing a strategy, and also the actions in the face of also the actions in the face of economic difficulties at the government has already taken. Does the noble Minister except that further progress is going to be challenging given the need to make the benefits bill fiscally sustainable, not least because of the legacy we inherited on PIP and disability and send, and does she agree that in addition to the priority for getting people back into work and people on sick benefit where we can, tackling child poverty by putting extra money into the purses and wallet of our poorest families remains a key government priority.
Lord Liddle (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
affordable housing and a commitment to rollout best start family hubs in every local authority. I welcome what the Minister has
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I welcome what the Minister has said about producing a strategy, and also the actions in the face of also the actions in the face of economic difficulties at the government has already taken. Does the noble Minister except that further progress is going to be challenging given the need to make the benefits bill fiscally sustainable, not least because of the legacy we inherited on PIP and disability and send, and does she agree that in addition to the priority for getting people back into work and people on sick benefit where we can, tackling child poverty by putting extra money into the purses and wallet of our poorest families remains a key government priority.
15:13
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
I thank him for his encouragement on what the government is done so far. It is significant. We have already committed to extending free school meals to all children from households in receipt of universal credit from September next year. That alone will lift 100,000 children across England out of poverty by the end of this Parliament and it will put 500 pounds back in those families pockets. That is significant. There is so much more to do, my noble friend is quite right about that.
The Child Poverty Strategy and the autumn will set out measures across the piece on dealing with child poverty. My local friend mentioned the need to make our system sustainable -- noble friend. There's no doubt the Social Security system is not fit for purpose, it is not serving those who need to depend on and it is not serving the taxpayer. We have plans to get involved in making sure the system works well and getting people into good jobs makes all the difference. It will also lift out of poverty the children in those families.
I look forward to doing that and I hope the whole house will support us. whole house will support us.
The Child Poverty Strategy and the autumn will set out measures across the piece on dealing with child poverty. My local friend mentioned the need to make our system sustainable -- noble friend. There's no doubt the Social Security system is not fit for purpose, it is not serving those who need to depend on and it is not serving the taxpayer. We have plans to get involved in making sure the system works well and getting people into good jobs makes all the difference. It will also lift out of poverty the children in those families.
I look forward to doing that and I hope the whole house will support us. whole house will support us.
15:14
Lord Harper (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Harper (Conservative)
As the government is considering its Child Poverty Strategy, can I urge it, particularly in light of her comments in the comments of the noble Lord about constraining the benefits bill, to retain the two- child benefit. That's an important measure to make sure families on benefits face the same choices as those who are not. If it were removed, rather than being a measure of fairness it would be unfair to those who work hard pay their taxes and strive to live within their means.
means.
means.
15:14
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
I'm not going to be commenting on the future because the child benefit -- poverty strategy will look at the ways to make changes not just to the benefit system, but to tackle peace in child poverty. The benefit system has so many flaws at the moment, we had to go in and try to look at the way it works across the piece. We have had to recognise that the way we support people who are sick or disabled the system does not serve them and it doesn't serve the taxpayer either.
We aren't supporting families in the appropriate way. Our job is to try to make the system work for everyone so those who can work and support their families do it and those who can't will know the state is there to support them.
We aren't supporting families in the appropriate way. Our job is to try to make the system work for everyone so those who can work and support their families do it and those who can't will know the state is there to support them.
15:15
Lord Palmer of Childs Hill (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Palmer of Childs Hill (Liberal Democrat)
... Whatever else I was going just before. Can I ask the Minister about the two-child benefit? I was disappointed and think she said the government was doing. There was no mention of it. There needs to be not mention of it. There needs to be not only a mention of it, but a date on it. When it's going to happen in the idea that people in poverty, children in poverty can wait while the government pontificates on whether it produces a change to whether it produces a change to whether it produces a change to
15:16
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
It is clear I cannot satisfy everybody. Understand his position on this but every time he raises this, he sits here and difficult. This government is committed to extending free school meals across the whole Universal Credit spectrum which will in itself left 100,000 children out of poverty during this Parliament. Please, can he encourage Parliament. Please, can he encourage us, not just attackers? -- attach us.
15:16
Lord Sahota (Labour)
-
-
Lord Sahota (Labour)
Removing the two Child Benefit cap will significantly impact minority communities, particularly those who have large families and are on a low income. This will affect health, education and social outcome for these children. You only have to look at places like Tower Hamlets in London will cover -- child poverty is over 40%. child poverty is over 40%.
15:17
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
If I can persuade the bishops to raise it, I will have a full House. I completely understand the wider point he is making. There is a real issue in this country for larger families facing poverty. Perhaps I can reassure him by pointing out the impact of some things we are doing. For example, expanding school meals. These meals go to each child in the household. The fact we have introduced breakfast clubs. The fact the healthy start scheme supports over 365,000 children.
All of these things help families that they help bigger families most of all. I hope that reassures him.
All of these things help families that they help bigger families most of all. I hope that reassures him.
15:17
Baroness Stedman-Scott (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Stedman-Scott (Conservative)
I'm not going to mention the two
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm not going to mention the two child benefit cap. Can I say how pleased I am to see the Minister in pleased I am to see the Minister in her place and I look forward to working with her as always. Can the Noble Baronesses the Minister please Noble Baronesses the Minister please reassure the house that the child poverty strategy will avoid a narrow focus on short-term income measures and instead promote long-term opportunity, resilience, and self- reliance for families?
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm not going to mention the two child benefit cap. Can I say how pleased I am to see the Minister in pleased I am to see the Minister in her place and I look forward to working with her as always. Can the Noble Baronesses the Minister please Noble Baronesses the Minister please reassure the house that the child poverty strategy will avoid a narrow focus on short-term income measures and instead promote long-term opportunity, resilience, and self- reliance for families?
15:18
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
reliance for families? I thank the Noble Baronesses for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I thank the Noble Baronesses for her kind words. Are very grateful. I agree with her very much indeed on agree with her very much indeed on that. I'm very glad to be here as well. Can I just say that I think she makes a really important point. The Child Poverty Strategy is not just about increasing incomes but also about reducing costs and increasing financial resilience and improving local support. We have to take action across all of those if we are to find the scourge of child poverty in this country in a way that builds structural improvements in the future.
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
reliance for families? I thank the Noble Baronesses for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I thank the Noble Baronesses for her kind words. Are very grateful. I agree with her very much indeed on agree with her very much indeed on that. I'm very glad to be here as well. Can I just say that I think she makes a really important point. The Child Poverty Strategy is not just about increasing incomes but also about reducing costs and increasing financial resilience and improving local support. We have to take action across all of those if we are to find the scourge of child poverty in this country in a way that builds structural improvements in the future.
15:19
The Lord Bishop of Leicester (Bishops)
-
-
The Lord Bishop of Leicester (Bishops)
My question is also not about the two-child limit although I am supportive of its removal. I wonder if the noble Baroness could say something about listening to the voices of children and young people in the formation of the strategy and give some examples of how the voices of children and young people have maybe changed the mind of government in its approach.
15:19
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
I'm grateful to the Right Reverend Prelate. The task force engaged astonishingly widely. We commissioned -- we employed a Children's Commissioner. We listened to children described their own experiences. The sometimes rings out things that the government wouldn't have thought of or organisations wouldn't have thought of. His colleague, the Bishop of Derby, invited me to Derby to meet families at the family home and look at what the local authority and faith groups were doing.
Everything that happens, were doing. Everything that happens, I'm blown away by the resilience of individual families and local authorities to work together to make their communities better. The more we can engage, the better we're going to do this.
Everything that happens, were doing. Everything that happens, I'm blown away by the resilience of individual families and local authorities to work together to make their communities better. The more we can engage, the better we're going to do this.
15:21
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
I thank her for the question. The report made for pretty harrowing reading. And it should do. If we're going to tackle these questions, we have to look at the reality of children's lives. The points you made was well made. The government is aware that homelessness levels are too high. Temporary accommodation is not working. We are committed to delivering long-term suggest -- solutions. That's why the Spending Review made clear we want to encourage better investment into temporary accommodation which will make that better.
That's £950 million in the last round of funding.
That's £950 million in the last round of funding.
15:21
15:22
Lord Balfe (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Balfe (Conservative)
I thank the Minister for her answer. This, of course, is a problem that goes back a long time. problem that goes back a long time. I saw in The Times that assessors are paid a bonus on interview number -- numbers. The higher the number, the higher the bonus they get. This may or may not be reasonable but at the time when there is a need to reduce expenditure on benefits and the time when we know that in personal interviews tended to lead to a strict application of the rules, I wonder if the Minister would consider the reintroduction of in-person interviews before new benefits are awarded or existing benefits are confirmed?
15:23
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
Face-to-face assessments. During covert. That was obviously for public health grounds. They resumed in mid-2021. The fact is that levels have been left far too low. In the middle of last year, there were just 7% face-to-face assessments across PIP and work capability assessments. That said, I think the assumption that if we change everything to face-to-face, the benefit will automatically come down is not a straightforward assumption based on the evidence available. I can reassure him by telling him that in our Pathways to Work green paper we said we were committed to doing more face-to-face assessments while preserving alternative health assessment channels because there are those that need that.
We are going to increase as quickly as possible and do it in the right way to ensure we provide a good service. And please do tell him that is our plan.
We are going to increase as quickly as possible and do it in the right way to ensure we provide a good service. And please do tell him that is our plan.
15:24
Lord Cryer (Labour)
-
-
Lord Cryer (Labour)
I'm all in favour of face-to-face interviews but they would be made a lot easier if we hadn't seen the closure of so many job centres prior to 2024. In the last round of closures involved 11 job centres closing doors in London alone. Many of these contravene government's own guidelines and it was purely a cost-cutting exercise.
15:24
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
Most assessments are done in assessment centres and many of those are providers because we have to have health providers do them. One of the things he may be glad to know, we have specific, clear rules about what an assessment centre must be. It must be accessible. They have to make sure it is reasonably easy to get to, that somebody can get from transport to the front door, that there are ramps. There are that there are ramps. There are specific centres which are designed for this purpose.
-- They are specific centres. specific centres.
-- They are specific centres. specific centres.
15:25
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
There are various ways you can do assessments. Can be done on paper. That's the starting point. Some of them clearly can be done on paper. For example, there can be people... There might be somebody near the end of life, somebody who engages a lot with physiotherapist or rehab teams after a stroke or surgery. There are other people were there is not any evidence for a range of reasons. In those cases, the assessment can be done on the telephone, video or face-to-face.
There are different reasons for different people. Some people cannot get to a face-to-face. They might be bedbound or suffer from some severe mental health condition. Some people would prefer face-to-face. Our aim is to keep all the channels available and to get the right balance both for making sure we get the right conditions for the claimant and the right decision for the government but also making sure we have all the people needed to move as fast as possible on assessments. assessments.
There are different reasons for different people. Some people cannot get to a face-to-face. They might be bedbound or suffer from some severe mental health condition. Some people would prefer face-to-face. Our aim is to keep all the channels available and to get the right balance both for making sure we get the right conditions for the claimant and the right decision for the government but also making sure we have all the people needed to move as fast as possible on assessments. assessments.
15:27
Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Conservative)
Can I ask how she would explain some of the statistics which have come from government sources? The number of people expected to go on long-term benefits will rise over this Parliament. 3000 people are signing on every day. In our second city, Birmingham, one and for working age adults is not working. That is higher than it was during the great depression -- one in four. the great depression -- one in four. What does she plan to do to switch the incentives for some of the people who are choosing to go on to benefits when they are capable of working?
15:27
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
I'm sure if the noble Lord tracked the statistics back, he would see when they began to rise -- when the numbers began to rise, and it wasn't under this government. He may have noticed that for the first time ever we have managed to stop that growth in economic inactivity. We've got a long way to go to bring that down. He is absolutely right to raise this as a major issue. We've had a significant rise in numbers of people claiming disability benefits.
One in 10 people are claiming sickness or disability benefit. Given what's going to happen to the bed the population is ageing -- to the population that is ageing, we must change the incentives, so we must change the incentives, so we will have the money -- halve the money to reduce the incentives. But the truth is that there are a lot of people who do not want to work. There are a lot of people who do want to work but don't have the skills, opportunity or support.
Our job is to tackle on all of those fronts. We will try to transform the system to give people the skills they need to serve them and the British economy.
One in 10 people are claiming sickness or disability benefit. Given what's going to happen to the bed the population is ageing -- to the population that is ageing, we must change the incentives, so we must change the incentives, so we will have the money -- halve the money to reduce the incentives. But the truth is that there are a lot of people who do not want to work. There are a lot of people who do want to work but don't have the skills, opportunity or support.
Our job is to tackle on all of those fronts. We will try to transform the system to give people the skills they need to serve them and the British economy.
15:29
Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative)
I am concerned about the over medicalisation of normal human conditions such as sadness. This is behind much of the rise in sickness and disability claim numbers. In her excellent work, which I commend her for, will she review the process of assessing these mental health condition so they can be targeted and the people who are for people who are in genuine and serious need?
15:29
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
She is absolutely right. There has been an increase in people claiming benefits due to these conditions. It is about trends in society. Job is in trying to invest in tackling these early enough. In the case of young people, let's tackle those questions early. We consulted in the green paper about what we do in the future and we're going to have a youth guarantee. One of the questions on that, we want to find the transition phase from those between 18 and 21.
We will find out what the challenges are, figure out how to support them and hopefully get them onto a path. There are some people who will sadly never be able to work. We need to help them get into it. into it.
We will find out what the challenges are, figure out how to support them and hopefully get them onto a path. There are some people who will sadly never be able to work. We need to help them get into it. into it.
15:30
Baroness Stedman-Scott (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Stedman-Scott (Conservative)
Can the Minister set out how increasing in person assessment, which these benches fully support, will help reduce fraud and error and thus protecting taxpayers money while ensuring another thing these benches support - that those who can work do and the those who need support get it? And can I ask the Minister if she would encourage her colleagues and the Secretary of State at the DWP to take up serious and mature offer made by the leader of the opposition to work with the government to help them cut and government to help them cut and
15:31
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Sherlock, The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Labour)
She rate may remember that in 2022 under the last government, the department ran a trial to figure out whether conducted with a distant trial -- different trial came with a different outcome. The trial data showed no substantial differences between work capability assessment and PIP, child award rates, links or normal amounts. My observation is that doesn't tell us whether individual claims were affected by the challenges, and at the time there were so few face-to-face assessments being conducted that I don't think that can tell us whether or not the move to remote assessment had an impact on the volume of claims.
Behaviour changes over time. We have committed to increasing face-to-face assessments while preserving the alternatives and we can look carefully whether or not that makes a difference. I think there may be some way to go before the Leader of the Opposition in the comments against the trust, given some of what's happened recently. However, I'm always happy to work with her and we could talk about these things day-to-day.
Behaviour changes over time. We have committed to increasing face-to-face assessments while preserving the alternatives and we can look carefully whether or not that makes a difference. I think there may be some way to go before the Leader of the Opposition in the comments against the trust, given some of what's happened recently. However, I'm always happy to work with her and we could talk about these things day-to-day.
15:32
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
I beg leave to ask the question standing in my name on the Order Paper.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The government currently has no plans to amend the existing legislation. Palestine Action has satisfied the test in the Terrorism satisfied the test in the Terrorism Act 2,000 having conducted a campaign involving intimidation and campaign involving intimidation and sustained criminal damage. Some of its members have been charged with serious and violent offences. In serious and violent offences. In passing I would like to thank the police for their professionalism in policing recent protests. The House should note that there were 17 arrest for assault on police officers at the demonstration on 6 September.
This is totally
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The government currently has no plans to amend the existing legislation. Palestine Action has satisfied the test in the Terrorism satisfied the test in the Terrorism Act 2,000 having conducted a campaign involving intimidation and campaign involving intimidation and sustained criminal damage. Some of its members have been charged with serious and violent offences. In serious and violent offences. In passing I would like to thank the police for their professionalism in policing recent protests. The House should note that there were 17 arrest for assault on police officers at the demonstration on 6 September.
This is totally
15:33
Lord Strasburger (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Strasburger (Liberal Democrat)
unacceptable.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I thank him for his predictable reply. Using terrorism laws on reply. Using terrorism laws on peaceful, elderly protesters is ridiculous. They are no more terrorist than the Minister himself. This absurd misuse of terrorism legislation is deeply damaging to legislation is deeply damaging to our freedom of speech. Will the government please stop shooting the government please stop shooting the messengers in Parliament Square and start listening to their message, which is that Britain is doing
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I thank him for his predictable reply. Using terrorism laws on reply. Using terrorism laws on peaceful, elderly protesters is ridiculous. They are no more terrorist than the Minister himself. This absurd misuse of terrorism legislation is deeply damaging to legislation is deeply damaging to our freedom of speech. Will the government please stop shooting the government please stop shooting the messengers in Parliament Square and start listening to their message, which is that Britain is doing
15:33
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
which is that Britain is doing nowhere near enough to stop the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
daily atrocities in Gaza. The noble Lord should know that
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The noble Lord should know that 20,000 people marched on Palestine in a recent demonstration, with totally peaceful activity, no totally peaceful activity, no arrests, no support and no encouragement for the type of activity undertaken by Palestine activity undertaken by Palestine Action. Palestine Action, the noble Action. Palestine Action, the noble Lord should know that as ministers we received an assessment from the joint terrorism assessment centre, which has said that that meet the which has said that that meet the tests of the 2,000 Terrorism Act.
Are we to ignore that? The powers we Are we to ignore that? The powers we have at this legislation mean that the support publicly as a committed the support publicly as a committed offence and if the police did make judgment to make arrest, those charges will be put by the CPS charges will be put by the CPS before a court and an individual will be charged, convicted and sentenced accordingly. It does not matter whether they are elderly matter whether they are elderly people or others, the offence is defined very clearly under the Terrorism Act.
The threshold for Terrorism Act. The threshold for that act has been met. If I'm predictable and saying that that is predictable and saying that that is because I'm fulfilling a duty on behalf of the UK to keep businesses and people safe from violent terrorist activity.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
daily atrocities in Gaza. The noble Lord should know that
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The noble Lord should know that 20,000 people marched on Palestine in a recent demonstration, with totally peaceful activity, no totally peaceful activity, no arrests, no support and no encouragement for the type of activity undertaken by Palestine activity undertaken by Palestine Action. Palestine Action, the noble Action. Palestine Action, the noble Lord should know that as ministers we received an assessment from the joint terrorism assessment centre, which has said that that meet the which has said that that meet the tests of the 2,000 Terrorism Act.
Are we to ignore that? The powers we Are we to ignore that? The powers we have at this legislation mean that the support publicly as a committed the support publicly as a committed offence and if the police did make judgment to make arrest, those charges will be put by the CPS charges will be put by the CPS before a court and an individual will be charged, convicted and sentenced accordingly. It does not matter whether they are elderly matter whether they are elderly people or others, the offence is defined very clearly under the Terrorism Act.
The threshold for Terrorism Act. The threshold for that act has been met. If I'm predictable and saying that that is predictable and saying that that is because I'm fulfilling a duty on behalf of the UK to keep businesses and people safe from violent terrorist activity.
15:35
Lord Clarke of Nottingham (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Clarke of Nottingham (Conservative)
A perfectly good case can be made for prescribing Palestine Action and I agree with that decision myself. -- Proscribing. Does the Minister agree that there is always been discretion in this country not to prosecute in the case where there is no public interest in arresting and prosecuting. Does he not accept that what has been happening with the arrest of hundreds of harmless old ladies simply for holding a placard is exactly what the demonstrators want the police to do.
They see it giving valuable, positive publicity to their views on Gaza and the survival of the proscribed organisation. Could he discuss at least with the police authorities whether it is really in the public interest to carry on using these massive police resources for what is actually counterproductive effect?
They see it giving valuable, positive publicity to their views on Gaza and the survival of the proscribed organisation. Could he discuss at least with the police authorities whether it is really in the public interest to carry on using these massive police resources for what is actually counterproductive effect?
15:36
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
The police to have discretion, it is not for ministers to order arrests or bring forward charges. It is for police at a local level to interpret the legislation that has been passed overwhelmingly by the House of Commons and by this House to proscribed the organisation. I say proscribed the organisation because the organisation on advice has met the test. If people wish to protest about Palestine, they could do so. They can march, they can protest, they can criticise Israel.
But Palestine Action has crossed that threshold and is the former Home Secretary himself, he will no Action. I hope people will not support those actions mistakenly while still, if they wish to, supporting the state of Palestine and any criticism they wish to make of the state of Israel. of the state of Israel.
But Palestine Action has crossed that threshold and is the former Home Secretary himself, he will no Action. I hope people will not support those actions mistakenly while still, if they wish to, supporting the state of Palestine and any criticism they wish to make of the state of Israel. of the state of Israel.
15:37
Lord Hain (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hain (Labour)
How exactly does the arrest on terrorism charges and over a thousand peacefully protesting retired magistrates, as well as vicars, priests, war veterans and descendents of Holocaust survivors help combat real terrorists like Hamas, al-Qaeda, Islamic State and in the past the IRA, who deliberately targeted and murdered innocent bystanders. He and I worked together Northern Ireland, he will know about this. Shouldn't our hard-pressed police be prioritising real crime like shoplifting, burglaries and antisocial behaviour instead of being forced to frog march normally law-abiding middle Britain citizens into further clogging up our courts.
15:38
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
Mineable friend and I have worked in Northern Ireland and on terrorism related issues. If he received a report from the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre saying that Palestine action had met the threshold for terrorist activity, I doubt very much whether he would have not signed that order is my right honourable friend the home secretary has done. We have done that because Palestine action have already had people convicted of not just criminal damage, but also of intimidation and physical threats. There are cases about which I cannot comment which are before the court.
There are allegations about a range of other behaviours. There is strong evidence from Jay Ptak about underground cells, plot against organisations and others. Again, if people wish to hold a placard saying I support Palestine Action, under the terms of the Palestine prevention order we've got, that is a defence -- and offence. People are sometimes mistaken in their conflation of report -- support for Palestine in support Palestine Action. When mineable friend says concentrate on neighbourhood policing or shoplifting or other things, I just say, 13,000 new police officers on the beat over those four years, measures of policing crime Bill, drive by this government to tackle antisocial behaviour, those are things we are doing, but we have a duty in this House and in a duty to protect our citizens against terrorism activity and when we get advice at the threshold as being cross, it would be irresponsible for me and other members of the Home Office team to ignore it.
ignore it.
There are allegations about a range of other behaviours. There is strong evidence from Jay Ptak about underground cells, plot against organisations and others. Again, if people wish to hold a placard saying I support Palestine Action, under the terms of the Palestine prevention order we've got, that is a defence -- and offence. People are sometimes mistaken in their conflation of report -- support for Palestine in support Palestine Action. When mineable friend says concentrate on neighbourhood policing or shoplifting or other things, I just say, 13,000 new police officers on the beat over those four years, measures of policing crime Bill, drive by this government to tackle antisocial behaviour, those are things we are doing, but we have a duty in this House and in a duty to protect our citizens against terrorism activity and when we get advice at the threshold as being cross, it would be irresponsible for me and other members of the Home Office team to ignore it.
ignore it.
15:39
Lord Hogan-Howe (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Hogan-Howe (Crossbench)
Recently a Labour MP commented that people had been arrested were not supporting terrorism, but they were objecting to the prohibition of the group. This is a fine distinction for the police to try to make on the street, what we should all be doing is rude -- supporting the police because it's a logical consequence that prohibiting the group and having a law that was passed by this place and others to make sure that support for terrorism was illegal.
The government must've considered the fact that this group had some of that support for its general intent if not its methods. One of the consequences police are going to have to try to resolve we all need to support them until this matter is resolved politically.
The government must've considered the fact that this group had some of that support for its general intent if not its methods. One of the consequences police are going to have to try to resolve we all need to support them until this matter is resolved politically.
15:40
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
The police are acting extremely professionally and I'm grateful for their support on this matter. Let me assure the House it is not an offence to say I wish to see the Palestine Action subscription overturned. People can hold a placard saying I wish to see Palestine Action proscription overturned. But they can't do is say I support Palestine Action in the same way because of the tests that have been made under this legislation, they can't say I support Hamas.
The police I hope will exercise their discretion and examine those issues. There has to be a line that is clear in the sand and the JTAC assessment to ministers was that line had been crossed and therefore we have had to take action. I appreciate and will continue to support the police in the difficult task they have of interpreting that action in an executive way which is not my responsibility to do.
The police I hope will exercise their discretion and examine those issues. There has to be a line that is clear in the sand and the JTAC assessment to ministers was that line had been crossed and therefore we have had to take action. I appreciate and will continue to support the police in the difficult task they have of interpreting that action in an executive way which is not my responsibility to do.
15:41
The Earl of Effingham (Conservative)
-
-
The Earl of Effingham (Conservative)
Peaceful protests about the unspeakable suffering in Gaza is entirely legal and allowed, but supporting an organisation which has been proscribed by Parliament and which engages in illegal activity, allegedly including hospitalising a female police officer, should not be permitted. How will the government explain the reality to the public and ensure this distinction is
**** Possible New Speaker ****
crystal clear. I'm grateful for the support of the noble Earl. We will do that and the noble Earl. We will do that and have done that, but there are several cases pending which we are not able to comment upon, so therefore I hope the public will take our acceptance of the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
crystal clear. I'm grateful for the support of the noble Earl. We will do that and the noble Earl. We will do that and have done that, but there are several cases pending which we are not able to comment upon, so therefore I hope the public will take our acceptance of the
15:42
Baroness Doocey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Baroness Doocey (Liberal Democrat)
take our acceptance of the understanding of the reasons that assessment has been made.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I condemn any demonstrators who attacked the police and I feel they attacked the police and I feel they should face the full force of the law. I have no doubt that the current approach is unsustainable. current approach is unsustainable. It blurs the line between violent or subversive action and legitimate subversive action and legitimate peaceful protest. The frontline police officers are strictly police officers are strictly following the letter of the law in the name of national security. But the name of national security.
But does the Minister honestly believe that mass arrests of clearly well- that mass arrests of clearly well- intentioned members of the public
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I condemn any demonstrators who attacked the police and I feel they attacked the police and I feel they should face the full force of the law. I have no doubt that the current approach is unsustainable. current approach is unsustainable. It blurs the line between violent or subversive action and legitimate subversive action and legitimate peaceful protest. The frontline police officers are strictly police officers are strictly following the letter of the law in the name of national security. But the name of national security.
But does the Minister honestly believe that mass arrests of clearly well- that mass arrests of clearly well- intentioned members of the public
15:43
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
-
-
Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
intentioned members of the public are proportionate, necessary, wise
**** Possible New Speaker ****
or serve the public interest? Again, I am in danger of repeating myself to the House, but I have to. Because the situation is have to. Because the situation is quite clear, there is a line in the sand drawn by legislation passed by sand drawn by legislation passed by this House in 2,000 on what a proscription order test is. We have proscription order test is. We have had advice on that proscription order test and we have passed legislation in both houses which proscribes the particular organisation.
In actually proscribing it, that then bands proscribing it, that then bands certain activity of which protest of support of that egg and -- support of that egg and -- organisation is one. If that line is crossed, it is there for the police crossed, it is there for the police to organise their discretion for the CPS to determine whether charges should be brought in for the court to determine the activity. None of that stopped anybody walking into that stopped anybody walking into Parliament Square today, standing up and condemning the state of Israel or protesting in favour of the state or protesting in favour of the state of Gaza and for Palestinian state.
Or condemning this government or any Or condemning this government or any other particular government about our actions in favour or against Palestine and Palestine state. The Palestine and Palestine state. The line has to be drawn and the line is drawn and I hope those individuals who support Palestine will say so in a way that meets the legal obligations of protest, allows that free protest, but does not support organisations, which is the noble Earl has said, because criminal damage, have destroyed businesses, have currently three major attacks, have thrown fireworks, pyrotechnics, have assaulted people in those buildings and have several court cases had which when they come out, if convictions are pursued, will show that there is further evidence
**** Possible New Speaker ****
in support of actions the government have taken. That concludes Oral Questions for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
That concludes Oral Questions for today. We now come to previously
**** Possible New Speaker ****
or serve the public interest? Again, I am in danger of repeating myself to the House, but I have to. Because the situation is have to. Because the situation is quite clear, there is a line in the sand drawn by legislation passed by sand drawn by legislation passed by this House in 2,000 on what a proscription order test is. We have proscription order test is. We have had advice on that proscription order test and we have passed legislation in both houses which proscribes the particular organisation.
In actually proscribing it, that then bands proscribing it, that then bands certain activity of which protest of support of that egg and -- support of that egg and -- organisation is one. If that line is crossed, it is there for the police crossed, it is there for the police to organise their discretion for the CPS to determine whether charges should be brought in for the court to determine the activity. None of that stopped anybody walking into that stopped anybody walking into Parliament Square today, standing up and condemning the state of Israel or protesting in favour of the state or protesting in favour of the state of Gaza and for Palestinian state.
Or condemning this government or any Or condemning this government or any other particular government about our actions in favour or against Palestine and Palestine state. The Palestine and Palestine state. The line has to be drawn and the line is drawn and I hope those individuals who support Palestine will say so in a way that meets the legal obligations of protest, allows that free protest, but does not support organisations, which is the noble Earl has said, because criminal damage, have destroyed businesses, have currently three major attacks, have thrown fireworks, pyrotechnics, have assaulted people in those buildings and have several court cases had which when they come out, if convictions are pursued, will show that there is further evidence
**** Possible New Speaker ****
in support of actions the government have taken. That concludes Oral Questions for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
That concludes Oral Questions for today. We now come to previously
15:45
Business of the House
-
Business of the House
today. We now come to previously committed in Grand Committee, amendment regulations 2025, Baroness
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Hayman of Ullock. I beg to move that the Motion standing in my name on the Order
**** Possible New Speaker ****
standing in my name on the Order The question is that this motion
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The question is that this motion be agreed to. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. And again, any
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Hayman of Ullock. I beg to move that the Motion standing in my name on the Order
**** Possible New Speaker ****
standing in my name on the Order The question is that this motion
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The question is that this motion be agreed to. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. And again, any
15:47
15:47
Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Conservative)
As the nature of the threat we are facing is shifting and lines are lured, does the government plan to centralise approval so that we can tackle, investigate and counter cyber threats and indeed critical tools such as secure messaging can be delivered to the various agencies that need them without the need for usual lengthy processes? usual lengthy processes?
15:47
Lord Leong (Labour)
-
-
Lord Leong (Labour)
Before I respond to the noble Lord's question, may take this opportunity to thank my noble friend for her sterling work as Minister, and I'm sure all noble Lords will thank her for her performance before this dispatch box and also her support to all members across the house, and I'm sure we will hear many more contributions from her from the backbenches. The new commercial and digital centre for excellence in the UK was substantially -- will substantially improve service delivery, enhance user satisfaction and drive proficiency.
The provision of cyber security services as a part of this vision. In addition, through the crown commercial services agreement, we also provide streamline to market for a shared services. I also need to set also that the government is working tirelessly to improve the cyber resilience of government systems. We have made important steps in understanding and mitigating cyber risks. We are now implementing a more interventional approach to address key risks and better support partners.
The provision of cyber security services as a part of this vision. In addition, through the crown commercial services agreement, we also provide streamline to market for a shared services. I also need to set also that the government is working tirelessly to improve the cyber resilience of government systems. We have made important steps in understanding and mitigating cyber risks. We are now implementing a more interventional approach to address key risks and better support partners.
15:49
Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat)
40% of companies in the UK reported last year that they had faced some sort of cyber-attack. High profile attacks such as de la, Marks & Spencer's and the British Museum are just the tip of this iceberg. The Minister referred to legislation so can he tell us when the Cyber Bill will appear and what will be the methodology that the cyber bill might take to solve this? The protagonist of this crime are not state-sponsored but they are tolerated and sponsored by the regimes in which they exist and they are part of the asymmetric war which this country faces.
Of course, business has to defend itself. The Minister has outlined by the government is doing now it's clear that is not enough. What is the government going to do that is government going to do that is different to what he's doing now to defend ourselves from this ever- growing problem?
Of course, business has to defend itself. The Minister has outlined by the government is doing now it's clear that is not enough. What is the government going to do that is government going to do that is different to what he's doing now to defend ourselves from this ever- growing problem?
15:50
Lord Leong (Labour)
-
-
Lord Leong (Labour)
The noble Lord made a couple of interesting points which is crucial and I will try to address all of this. Cyber security of the UK is a key priority for this government. It is crucial to protect public service, protect the public and our way of life, and a successful growing colony. It is vital to protect businesses against cyber attacks. We are also providing businesses with tools, advice and support to protect themselves from cyber threats, including cyber governance code of conduct which shows boards and directors how to effectively manage cyber security organisation.
Before I was invited to be part of government, when I ran my businesses, I insured all my businesses had cyber security certificates. That's the basic requirement you need. At the same time, businesses need to also support and protect themselves having sufficient cyber security insurance. This includes training for boards and set. An early warning system to be notified of cyber threats. When parliamentary time allows, this government will introduce the cyber security and resilience bill to raise cyber security standards and critical and water.
Before I was invited to be part of government, when I ran my businesses, I insured all my businesses had cyber security certificates. That's the basic requirement you need. At the same time, businesses need to also support and protect themselves having sufficient cyber security insurance. This includes training for boards and set. An early warning system to be notified of cyber threats. When parliamentary time allows, this government will introduce the cyber security and resilience bill to raise cyber security standards and critical and water.
15:52
15:52
Lord Leong (Labour)
-
-
Lord Leong (Labour)
Thank the noble Baroness for that. I'm sure most noble Lords will appreciate and will expect it would not be appropriate for me to comment on any ongoing incident. However, computer misuse continues by those with access to systems for a range of munitions -- militias reasons including cyber crime and espionage including cyber crime and espionage -- militias reasons. -- malicious. The government does not have any plans to extend further cyber - related risks.
15:53
Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative)
Sophistication of cyber attacks is increasing exponentially. When will the government introduce the Cyber Security Resilience Bill? And Cyber Security Resilience Bill? And will the bill include provisions to enable our cyber professionals to do what they do best, protect this what they do best, protect this country and protect its citizens? country and protect its citizens?
15:53
Lord Leong (Labour)
-
-
Lord Leong (Labour)
Perhaps the noble Lord did not hear my last answer. Tackling cyber threats is a priority for this government. As I mentioned, when parliamentary time allows, the government will introduce a Cyber Security Resilience Bill to raise cyber security standards in the critical infrastructure of essential services such as water, energy and NHS. And I'm told security.
15:54
The Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops)
-
-
The Lord Bishop of Oxford (Bishops)
The APPG on AI on Monday had a very striking presentation from the Polish minister of defence and cyber security who talked about the joined up thinking his nation has developed in terms of defence and commercial attacks of this kind. Can I ask the Minister what has been done by the government to join up thinking and defence industry in terms of cyber attacks and can I further ask, in the light of the government's promotion of artificial intelligence, does the government consider this increases the risk of cyber attacks of this kind and what steps is the government taking to advocate responsible and cautious adoption of AI to mitigate this risk? risk?
15:55
Lord Leong (Labour)
-
-
Lord Leong (Labour)
I thank the noble credit for that question. -- prelate. In 2024, hundreds of incidents were managed. In 2025, the cyber security breach service shows that less than half of businesses, somewhere around 43%, and around one third of charities reported they had experienced any kind of cyber security breach. Cyber-attacks attack all kinds of companies. We have to be vigilant. The government sees the role of the The government sees the role of the cyber security sector as the driving point.
The government has got a plan working across the bill together and hopefully parliamentary time allows hopefully parliamentary time allows to bring it forward.
The government has got a plan working across the bill together and hopefully parliamentary time allows hopefully parliamentary time allows to bring it forward.
15:56
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
I wanted to express appreciation of the work of Baroness Jones and to wish her well in her non-ministerial capacity. Specifically, given reports of the attack has been claimed by hacker groups linked to Scattered Spider who I also believe responsible for attacks on UK retailers, including Marks & Spencer's, what enhanced intelligence sharing mechanisms as the government establishing between business sectors to prevent coordinated attacks by the same threat actors? threat actors?
15:56
Lord Leong (Labour)
-
-
Lord Leong (Labour)
I'm sure the noble Lord will appreciate that there is only so much I can say as to what government is doing but I can assure him that we are speaking to business across with businesses across sectors -- businesses across sectors. Were working with businesses, including working with businesses, including M&S and previously JLR. We cannot further comment on specifics at this stage, including with regard to potential perpetrators. The National Crime Agency has warned of a rise in teenage boys being drawn onto online criminal communities.
That is coordinating responses to online network hubs across the United
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Kingdom. Do we need a moment just to clear
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Do we need a moment just to clear
That is coordinating responses to online network hubs across the United
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Kingdom. Do we need a moment just to clear
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Do we need a moment just to clear
15:58
Legislation: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – committee stage (day 10) - part two
-
Legislation: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – committee stage (day 10) - part two
House House to House to be House to be again House to be again in House to be again in the House to be again in the committee on the Children's Wellbeing and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Schools Bill. Baroness Smith. To move that the house do now resolve itself into committee upon the bill.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the bill. The question is that the house now resolve itself into a committee upon the bill. All of those in upon the bill. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contrary say, "Not content". The contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. I understand that we are in the middle of a group so if we are able to continue from that if we are able to continue from that point, I believe the next speaker is
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Schools Bill. Baroness Smith. To move that the house do now resolve itself into committee upon the bill.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the bill. The question is that the house now resolve itself into a committee upon the bill. All of those in upon the bill. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contrary say, "Not content". The contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. I understand that we are in the middle of a group so if we are able to continue from that if we are able to continue from that point, I believe the next speaker is
15:59
Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Non-affiliated)
-
-
Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Non-affiliated)
ready to go. As you wish.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Just before I was rudely interrupted for lunch, I was going to move amendments forging 30 and to move amendments forging 30 and 436 in this group. Amendment 436 as the substantive amendment relating to the Independent schools Inspectorate and number 430 is the Inspectorate and number 430 is the consequential amendment. Can I please thank the Noble Baronesses please thank the Noble Baronesses Baroness Berridge and Baroness Gale men for their support for these amendments? -- Baroness Spelman. This is an amendment to test the performance of the Independent schools Inspectorate.
The ISI is schools Inspectorate. The ISI is accountable to the Department of education. In fact, if anybody would have a complaint about the work of have a complaint about the work of the ISI, then they would be able to go to the Department for Education and asked them to look into a way and asked them to look into a way that an intersection has taken place that an intersection has taken place -- and inspection has taken place, potentially taking any questions they might have about the Independent School Inspectorate.
If the Minister would be able in summing up or by writing to me say -- set out how confident the Department for Education is about Department for Education is about the ISI and how the Department for Education -- how many complaints the Department for Education gets about Department for Education gets about And it's often very contentious. I'm grateful to say for the support of the noble Baroness is a former Ofsted chief inspector who has experience unequalled by many in the chamber in relation to school inspection.
We only have to look at the headlines generated this week by the governments own proposed new Ofsted handbook just to see how strongly everybody involved in education feels about school inspection. Accountability is absolutely essential for parents to know how their children school and education setting is doing, but also for schools themselves. It's also essential, and I say this having been in the Department for Education, I think ministers may agree with me on this, that for ministers themselves and officials in the department, school account ability is critical.
If there's an issue particularly in relation to Scaife -- safeguarding or the way school is being run, the answer is to send an Ofsted to check what is going on and the department ministers will accept what they are given. I actually think that the strength of our accountability mechanism is the reason we have such good schools in England. The particular focus for me and the reason I wanted to table this amendment is I'm interested in the ISI's inspection and the quality of their inspection in relation to the role of governance and the quality of governance of our schools, which is again of critical importance.
Governance is not necessarily the same as leadership and management. Those phrases often run together throughout the relevant handbooks. And I had to rush my speech I would not have referred to this bit, but I have done just a check and really of the two frameworks in the handbooks and the independent schools Inspectorate handbook for inspection talks about inspectors covering a range of sources of evidence, including evidence of how those with government responsibility assure themselves that leaders and managers are fulfilling their responsibility to ensure the standards are met will stop the November 2025 this proposed Ofsted handbook that will come into force in two months time and I appreciate there's lots of debate around that, talks about the relevant factors.
It talks about leaders and those responsible for governments understanding their respective roles and their performance in these roles in a way that enhances the school's effectiveness. The point being that I think the Ofsted framework is tougher and stronger and rightly so because it's not just asking governance and those charged with governance to look at how leaders and managers, in this case we are probably talking about heads or senior management roles, how they are doing, but asking the governance to reflect on their own performance.
I think that's essential. I did think I should ask for this amendment to be put into the next group, we are about to talk in the next group about the inspection of multi-Academy trust themselves. I think that is right, I will speak in support and that is something many people have been calling for, but the point about inspection of governance, when you are inspecting something you have to so might almost second-guess and work on in the organisation who is calling the shots.
In many cases what we are finding rightly is that above the schools themselves there will be some kind of other body. In case of the ISI inspection I encountered, there was a foundation sitting above the four schools, which one of the foundations decided to pose. What happened in the end was the inspectors decided to look at the performance of the individual school governing body and not the foundation governing body and it was a foundation governing body that was calling the shots.
And actually I think overseeing a woeful appointments process for one of the head teachers. I think personal experience not necessarily was the best thing to talk about in this House when looking at amendments, but I could not miss this opportunity just to probe what the departments thinking is on this. I think Ofsted do a better job, I think the new framework is stronger and I would be very interested to know in her summing up of this group, what the department thinks about this if there is any appetite for the independent schools Inspectorate to be brought under or Ofsted taking of their responsibilities so that all of our young people in all of our schools in this country are inspected, the way they are educated, the way they letter and investigated to the same standards.
If the Minister is not able to answer all the questions today, I would be grateful if she would be prepared to meet me on this.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to speak to amendments 430 and 436 to which I've added my name. I'm grateful to my noble friend for I'm grateful to my noble friend for raising this issue at second reading as I've been concerned about ISI and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Just before I was rudely interrupted for lunch, I was going to move amendments forging 30 and to move amendments forging 30 and 436 in this group. Amendment 436 as the substantive amendment relating to the Independent schools Inspectorate and number 430 is the Inspectorate and number 430 is the consequential amendment. Can I please thank the Noble Baronesses please thank the Noble Baronesses Baroness Berridge and Baroness Gale men for their support for these amendments? -- Baroness Spelman. This is an amendment to test the performance of the Independent schools Inspectorate.
The ISI is schools Inspectorate. The ISI is accountable to the Department of education. In fact, if anybody would have a complaint about the work of have a complaint about the work of the ISI, then they would be able to go to the Department for Education and asked them to look into a way and asked them to look into a way that an intersection has taken place that an intersection has taken place -- and inspection has taken place, potentially taking any questions they might have about the Independent School Inspectorate.
If the Minister would be able in summing up or by writing to me say -- set out how confident the Department for Education is about Department for Education is about the ISI and how the Department for Education -- how many complaints the Department for Education gets about Department for Education gets about And it's often very contentious. I'm grateful to say for the support of the noble Baroness is a former Ofsted chief inspector who has experience unequalled by many in the chamber in relation to school inspection.
We only have to look at the headlines generated this week by the governments own proposed new Ofsted handbook just to see how strongly everybody involved in education feels about school inspection. Accountability is absolutely essential for parents to know how their children school and education setting is doing, but also for schools themselves. It's also essential, and I say this having been in the Department for Education, I think ministers may agree with me on this, that for ministers themselves and officials in the department, school account ability is critical.
If there's an issue particularly in relation to Scaife -- safeguarding or the way school is being run, the answer is to send an Ofsted to check what is going on and the department ministers will accept what they are given. I actually think that the strength of our accountability mechanism is the reason we have such good schools in England. The particular focus for me and the reason I wanted to table this amendment is I'm interested in the ISI's inspection and the quality of their inspection in relation to the role of governance and the quality of governance of our schools, which is again of critical importance.
Governance is not necessarily the same as leadership and management. Those phrases often run together throughout the relevant handbooks. And I had to rush my speech I would not have referred to this bit, but I have done just a check and really of the two frameworks in the handbooks and the independent schools Inspectorate handbook for inspection talks about inspectors covering a range of sources of evidence, including evidence of how those with government responsibility assure themselves that leaders and managers are fulfilling their responsibility to ensure the standards are met will stop the November 2025 this proposed Ofsted handbook that will come into force in two months time and I appreciate there's lots of debate around that, talks about the relevant factors.
It talks about leaders and those responsible for governments understanding their respective roles and their performance in these roles in a way that enhances the school's effectiveness. The point being that I think the Ofsted framework is tougher and stronger and rightly so because it's not just asking governance and those charged with governance to look at how leaders and managers, in this case we are probably talking about heads or senior management roles, how they are doing, but asking the governance to reflect on their own performance.
I think that's essential. I did think I should ask for this amendment to be put into the next group, we are about to talk in the next group about the inspection of multi-Academy trust themselves. I think that is right, I will speak in support and that is something many people have been calling for, but the point about inspection of governance, when you are inspecting something you have to so might almost second-guess and work on in the organisation who is calling the shots.
In many cases what we are finding rightly is that above the schools themselves there will be some kind of other body. In case of the ISI inspection I encountered, there was a foundation sitting above the four schools, which one of the foundations decided to pose. What happened in the end was the inspectors decided to look at the performance of the individual school governing body and not the foundation governing body and it was a foundation governing body that was calling the shots.
And actually I think overseeing a woeful appointments process for one of the head teachers. I think personal experience not necessarily was the best thing to talk about in this House when looking at amendments, but I could not miss this opportunity just to probe what the departments thinking is on this. I think Ofsted do a better job, I think the new framework is stronger and I would be very interested to know in her summing up of this group, what the department thinks about this if there is any appetite for the independent schools Inspectorate to be brought under or Ofsted taking of their responsibilities so that all of our young people in all of our schools in this country are inspected, the way they are educated, the way they letter and investigated to the same standards.
If the Minister is not able to answer all the questions today, I would be grateful if she would be prepared to meet me on this.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to speak to amendments 430 and 436 to which I've added my name. I'm grateful to my noble friend for I'm grateful to my noble friend for raising this issue at second reading as I've been concerned about ISI and
16:07
Baroness Berridge (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Berridge (Conservative)
previously SIS and former Inspectorate of independent schools. I think there's a number of queries in relation to the function which I will probably theme is visibility and responsibility. Particularly building on what the noble Lady said, the visibility for the Department of Education. There is that accountability there, but for the department itself, its regulatory function and by that I mean do these independent schools comply with the independent school standards. The evidence on which the department is relying to perform its regulatory role and then potentially enforcement action in relation to schools is dependent on the information usually obtained through ISI, which I believe my noble friend will more ably outline is something that's more akin to a peer review system rather than that that we would know through Ofsted.
Also in relation to the independent sector there is less visibility. For the state schools, and numerically half of the independent sector, and I would say the more tricky half that art in the Association, they sit with Ofsted. So the visibility at the centre in England is Ofsted, directors of children's services, local authorities because of the maintained schools and actually the DfE itself because of the Academy system, there is an excellent team of regional school staff who know what is happening on the ground.
In their area they are usually incredibly well-informed, they are in close contact with the regulator, they are liaising with the regional teams of Ofsted, and so they really have a feel, as you sit at the centre you know you have an arm reaching out across England. They know that the schools doing really well, this one's going to get into good, they just had that field. You sit at the centre and think about the independent sector. Although the noble Lady is outline, parents can call in, but you don't sit there with the same confidence, particularly with regards to safeguarding and we have had all kinds of historic problems, serious problems, hopefully a matter of the past in both the state and independent sector.
So you have much less knowledge and a feel of what is happening and you are there is the regulator in relation to independent schools in a slightly different way to the state sector. So I think there is more risk to a Minister as the regulator, particularly because it's a lack of knowledge. Perhaps I can give you an example of where I think Ofsted have been really good over the last few years and that is highlighting the issue of off rolling. What on earth can that have up likeability in the independent sector.
Let me give you some form of a situation. Could you perhaps have a troublesome child in an independent school? They have maybe been a bit violent? You call the parents and have a discussion, nobody wants to put it risk the child's education and the reputation of the school so they just disappear. But they pop up again at another independent school in the same thing happens. I have read enough ISI inspections to know that unlike Ofsted where they can look at the data, where the children, where have they gone to, they will be somewhere else in the system.
I accept the unique reference number may help this, but have we really got the rigour within the ISI system to spot a child like this who probably needs much more significant intervention before they get to their teenage years and this propensity, not just for behaviour, but maybe for serious behavioural issues, has not been caught. How do you check whether what I've outlined is the case? Really, and ISI peer review system? Also, there's the fact that ISI is funded from within the schools inspect, but it is maintained its independence from the ISC.
They may be formally independent, but are they relationally and dependent? This is a network of individuals, it's a means to train as a head teacher in an association school is to become an associate inspector. Does DfE have any role in the appointment of board members of ISI? Whose inspections they rely on is regulate her. It seems odd if they don't. Entry to ISI usually or has been on the basis of an Ofsted good inspection before you can join if you are a new school.
With the new Ofsted framework do you need to be expected, strong, or expected standard to be able to join ISI? Who's going to be determining that? It just seems unusual that you have this system of entry that isn't really managed by the department. I think this is sadly a failed market. It's a historical accident, there is not malevolence in this, but we wouldn't allow BUPA and private hospitals to operate like this. They are all inspected by CQC. Is it the case that is a smaller Inspectorate of this market didn't work, was it that they were put straight into ISI? Without any of that entry criteria of going by Ofsted for a good inspection? I honestly don't know because there's not visibility.
Whether ISI is transferred to Ofsted as the amendment suggested, I think there just needs to be greater quality control of the inspections by ISI and those entrance criteria. And some sort of calibration of ISI inspections, particularly in relation to safeguarding. The harm done to children by failures of safeguarding is no respecter of social class. Ensuring visibility of the rigour or otherwise of ISI inspections in this regard I believe is vital. I have wondered and still wonder if children in the independent system could ironically be more vulnerable due to this historical accident of an
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Inspectorate ISI. I would like to speak to a men's
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to speak to a men's 429 and 433 in the name of my noble friend, to which I've added my own. friend, to which I've added my own. The pleasure to see the noble Lord back in his place. An bill such as His experience is extremely important and we should heed his advice. I declare my interest as chairman of Governor of Brentwood chairman of Governor of Brentwood schools and the Institute of boarding. As my noble friend said, these two straightforward amendments do not in any way strike at the
Also in relation to the independent sector there is less visibility. For the state schools, and numerically half of the independent sector, and I would say the more tricky half that art in the Association, they sit with Ofsted. So the visibility at the centre in England is Ofsted, directors of children's services, local authorities because of the maintained schools and actually the DfE itself because of the Academy system, there is an excellent team of regional school staff who know what is happening on the ground.
In their area they are usually incredibly well-informed, they are in close contact with the regulator, they are liaising with the regional teams of Ofsted, and so they really have a feel, as you sit at the centre you know you have an arm reaching out across England. They know that the schools doing really well, this one's going to get into good, they just had that field. You sit at the centre and think about the independent sector. Although the noble Lady is outline, parents can call in, but you don't sit there with the same confidence, particularly with regards to safeguarding and we have had all kinds of historic problems, serious problems, hopefully a matter of the past in both the state and independent sector.
So you have much less knowledge and a feel of what is happening and you are there is the regulator in relation to independent schools in a slightly different way to the state sector. So I think there is more risk to a Minister as the regulator, particularly because it's a lack of knowledge. Perhaps I can give you an example of where I think Ofsted have been really good over the last few years and that is highlighting the issue of off rolling. What on earth can that have up likeability in the independent sector.
Let me give you some form of a situation. Could you perhaps have a troublesome child in an independent school? They have maybe been a bit violent? You call the parents and have a discussion, nobody wants to put it risk the child's education and the reputation of the school so they just disappear. But they pop up again at another independent school in the same thing happens. I have read enough ISI inspections to know that unlike Ofsted where they can look at the data, where the children, where have they gone to, they will be somewhere else in the system.
I accept the unique reference number may help this, but have we really got the rigour within the ISI system to spot a child like this who probably needs much more significant intervention before they get to their teenage years and this propensity, not just for behaviour, but maybe for serious behavioural issues, has not been caught. How do you check whether what I've outlined is the case? Really, and ISI peer review system? Also, there's the fact that ISI is funded from within the schools inspect, but it is maintained its independence from the ISC.
They may be formally independent, but are they relationally and dependent? This is a network of individuals, it's a means to train as a head teacher in an association school is to become an associate inspector. Does DfE have any role in the appointment of board members of ISI? Whose inspections they rely on is regulate her. It seems odd if they don't. Entry to ISI usually or has been on the basis of an Ofsted good inspection before you can join if you are a new school.
With the new Ofsted framework do you need to be expected, strong, or expected standard to be able to join ISI? Who's going to be determining that? It just seems unusual that you have this system of entry that isn't really managed by the department. I think this is sadly a failed market. It's a historical accident, there is not malevolence in this, but we wouldn't allow BUPA and private hospitals to operate like this. They are all inspected by CQC. Is it the case that is a smaller Inspectorate of this market didn't work, was it that they were put straight into ISI? Without any of that entry criteria of going by Ofsted for a good inspection? I honestly don't know because there's not visibility.
Whether ISI is transferred to Ofsted as the amendment suggested, I think there just needs to be greater quality control of the inspections by ISI and those entrance criteria. And some sort of calibration of ISI inspections, particularly in relation to safeguarding. The harm done to children by failures of safeguarding is no respecter of social class. Ensuring visibility of the rigour or otherwise of ISI inspections in this regard I believe is vital. I have wondered and still wonder if children in the independent system could ironically be more vulnerable due to this historical accident of an
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Inspectorate ISI. I would like to speak to a men's
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to speak to a men's 429 and 433 in the name of my noble friend, to which I've added my own. friend, to which I've added my own. The pleasure to see the noble Lord back in his place. An bill such as His experience is extremely important and we should heed his advice. I declare my interest as chairman of Governor of Brentwood chairman of Governor of Brentwood schools and the Institute of boarding. As my noble friend said, these two straightforward amendments do not in any way strike at the
16:13
Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Black of Brentwood (Conservative)
do not in any way strike at the integrity of the bill or seek to undermine what it is setting out to achieve. They are simply practical amendments designed to ensure that as far as independent schools, which are a vital part of the independent sector are concerned, the legislation works as effectively as possible. As it stands under the bill the secretary of state has the power unilaterally to require independent schools to have regard to guidance issued by the department. This is not an onerous requirement and what my noble friend, I have no problem with the principal, indeed I see much merit in it.
Where I do see it -- have a problem is a tendency of guidance over time to acquire statutory force, particularly if the courts become involved at any point. It is therefore vital that any guidance issued has proper scrutiny and that those affected have a chance to make their views known through Parliament. As a veteran of years of legislation impacting on the media, I know all too well that seemingly innocuous guidance can sometimes have the most profound unintended consequences, especially were regulatory creep sets in.
Without being unduly bureaucratic or slowing the process down in any way, this straightforward amendment simply seeks to ensure that in three key areas of vital operational independence for schools in the sector, that is curriculum, admissions and examinations, there will be proper scrutiny of any guidance to ensure it is practical, does not add unnecessary burdens on schools or encroach on their independence. And above all his future proofed. That is what noble lords are here to do, to scrutinise. This amendment ensures we have a chance to do it properly.
Amendment 433 is about practicalities. As I know for my own expense, it's not uncommon for people joining a school or moving into specialist provision for the first time with one diagnosis requiring special support, rapidly to be diagnosed with another underlying condition identified by experts at the school. As it stands, this bill will make it well-nigh impossible for schools properly and effectively to deal with that without either placing themselves in legal jeopardy or worse still, having to remove the child from the school until the material change process is completed.
In order to process is completed. In order to process is completed. In order to That cannot be what we want for children in a vulnerable position. It's causing great concern among independent special school experts. My noble friends amendment is a sensible, proportionate way to deal with the issue. It cuts through what appears to be and not by making it explicitly clear that the interests of the child has to come first and that experts can move to help them immediately and do the paperwork later -- a knot.
It does not strike at the integrity of the bill as it does not relieve schools of the duty -- their duties. It's just saying a child needs help, let's get on with it and help them. I hope the Committee will support these amendments. I'd like to say a brief word about amendments 430 and 436 which aim to bring in an inspection of independent schools. I find of independent schools. I find . I hope she will forgive me.
The ISI has worked well for 26 years, inspecting some 1200 schools a year and covering around half a million children. It is also carrying out inspections in overseas schools. It is not as lady Berridge was implying, some kind of cosy cartel, but a fully fledged regulated body with a leadership team wholly independent of the Independent Schools Council. Ofsted itself reduces an annual report on their work. It's never found evidence that ISI is anything but strong and ISI is anything but strong and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
steady in its inspections. Perhaps I could inform my noble
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Perhaps I could inform my noble friend that the oversight mechanism friend that the oversight mechanism for ISI was first reduced by for ISI was first reduced by removing the strand for monitoring a sample of inspections and sample of inspections and subsequently withdrew the amendments
**** Possible New Speaker ****
-- the remaining amendments. That's not how I understand it to be the case. Perhaps we can speak about that afterwards. Most about that afterwards. Most importantly, the resume is effective because inspection is best conducted because inspection is best conducted by experts who know the sector. The ISI Inspectorate is made up of people who understand how it works. This is particularly true for boarding schools which have a different operational model from the different operational model from the vast majority of schools that Ofsted vast majority of schools that Ofsted inspectors.
The noble Lady rightly mentions accountability and that is mentions accountability and that is extremely important point. It seems to me that peer review in this case is the best way to produce some form is the best way to produce some form of accountability but we will have to differ on that. ISI is also self funding. This is important in current economic circumstances. It is not a burden on the taxpayer. Changing this tried and tested an effective system would be costly, placing additional burdens on Ofsted, it would also be disruptive.
I hear what the noble Lady says but I do not believe it to be the case for such a significant change to be necessary. Nor is there a clamour within the sector. I hope the committee will reject these amendments. -- A clamour within the sector for these reforms. sector for these reforms.
Where I do see it -- have a problem is a tendency of guidance over time to acquire statutory force, particularly if the courts become involved at any point. It is therefore vital that any guidance issued has proper scrutiny and that those affected have a chance to make their views known through Parliament. As a veteran of years of legislation impacting on the media, I know all too well that seemingly innocuous guidance can sometimes have the most profound unintended consequences, especially were regulatory creep sets in.
Without being unduly bureaucratic or slowing the process down in any way, this straightforward amendment simply seeks to ensure that in three key areas of vital operational independence for schools in the sector, that is curriculum, admissions and examinations, there will be proper scrutiny of any guidance to ensure it is practical, does not add unnecessary burdens on schools or encroach on their independence. And above all his future proofed. That is what noble lords are here to do, to scrutinise. This amendment ensures we have a chance to do it properly.
Amendment 433 is about practicalities. As I know for my own expense, it's not uncommon for people joining a school or moving into specialist provision for the first time with one diagnosis requiring special support, rapidly to be diagnosed with another underlying condition identified by experts at the school. As it stands, this bill will make it well-nigh impossible for schools properly and effectively to deal with that without either placing themselves in legal jeopardy or worse still, having to remove the child from the school until the material change process is completed.
In order to process is completed. In order to process is completed. In order to That cannot be what we want for children in a vulnerable position. It's causing great concern among independent special school experts. My noble friends amendment is a sensible, proportionate way to deal with the issue. It cuts through what appears to be and not by making it explicitly clear that the interests of the child has to come first and that experts can move to help them immediately and do the paperwork later -- a knot.
It does not strike at the integrity of the bill as it does not relieve schools of the duty -- their duties. It's just saying a child needs help, let's get on with it and help them. I hope the Committee will support these amendments. I'd like to say a brief word about amendments 430 and 436 which aim to bring in an inspection of independent schools. I find of independent schools. I find . I hope she will forgive me.
The ISI has worked well for 26 years, inspecting some 1200 schools a year and covering around half a million children. It is also carrying out inspections in overseas schools. It is not as lady Berridge was implying, some kind of cosy cartel, but a fully fledged regulated body with a leadership team wholly independent of the Independent Schools Council. Ofsted itself reduces an annual report on their work. It's never found evidence that ISI is anything but strong and ISI is anything but strong and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
steady in its inspections. Perhaps I could inform my noble
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Perhaps I could inform my noble friend that the oversight mechanism friend that the oversight mechanism for ISI was first reduced by for ISI was first reduced by removing the strand for monitoring a sample of inspections and sample of inspections and subsequently withdrew the amendments
**** Possible New Speaker ****
-- the remaining amendments. That's not how I understand it to be the case. Perhaps we can speak about that afterwards. Most about that afterwards. Most importantly, the resume is effective because inspection is best conducted because inspection is best conducted by experts who know the sector. The ISI Inspectorate is made up of people who understand how it works. This is particularly true for boarding schools which have a different operational model from the different operational model from the vast majority of schools that Ofsted vast majority of schools that Ofsted inspectors.
The noble Lady rightly mentions accountability and that is mentions accountability and that is extremely important point. It seems to me that peer review in this case is the best way to produce some form is the best way to produce some form of accountability but we will have to differ on that. ISI is also self funding. This is important in current economic circumstances. It is not a burden on the taxpayer. Changing this tried and tested an effective system would be costly, placing additional burdens on Ofsted, it would also be disruptive.
I hear what the noble Lady says but I do not believe it to be the case for such a significant change to be necessary. Nor is there a clamour within the sector. I hope the committee will reject these amendments. -- A clamour within the sector for these reforms. sector for these reforms.
16:20
Baroness Whitaker (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Whitaker (Labour)
I rise to support amendments in the name of Lady Blackstone and Lady Morris. My reasons are exactly as I set out in our discussions in the previous group so I will just sum up to my noble friend the Minister that we need to have an effective grip on unregistered schools because of the undoubted harm to education and well-being done by some of them with impunity.
16:21
Lord Agnew of Oulton (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Agnew of Oulton (Conservative)
Can I just rise in support of the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Can I just rise in support of the amendment 432A in the name of Baroness Blackstone and Morris. I Baroness Blackstone and Morris. I don't think any group in our society should be given the right to fully should be given the right to fully exclude themselves from mainstream British I. I was the fifth minister British I. I was the fifth minister for a time. They were very good at that. They are charming people. I that. They are charming people.
I had to fight to get them to teach in had to fight to get them to teach in English. I do feel that to compare English. I do feel that to compare it to an easy-going Sunday school feels disingenuous. Sunday school is feels disingenuous. Sunday school is unlikely to be 10 hours a day. These yeshivas are running for 10 days -- yeshivas are running for 10 days -- 10 hours a day, five days a week. I do hope the Minister will look at do hope the Minister will look at this carefully because I think otherwise we are setting a very dangerous precedent.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
dangerous precedent. May I add my support to what my
**** Possible New Speaker ****
May I add my support to what my noble friend has just said. I think it is a matter of balance, as Baroness Morris said. Barrett -- balance between the needs of a child
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Can I just rise in support of the amendment 432A in the name of Baroness Blackstone and Morris. I Baroness Blackstone and Morris. I don't think any group in our society should be given the right to fully should be given the right to fully exclude themselves from mainstream British I. I was the fifth minister British I. I was the fifth minister for a time. They were very good at that. They are charming people. I that. They are charming people.
I had to fight to get them to teach in had to fight to get them to teach in English. I do feel that to compare English. I do feel that to compare it to an easy-going Sunday school feels disingenuous. Sunday school is feels disingenuous. Sunday school is unlikely to be 10 hours a day. These yeshivas are running for 10 days -- yeshivas are running for 10 days -- 10 hours a day, five days a week. I do hope the Minister will look at do hope the Minister will look at this carefully because I think otherwise we are setting a very dangerous precedent.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
dangerous precedent. May I add my support to what my
**** Possible New Speaker ****
May I add my support to what my noble friend has just said. I think it is a matter of balance, as Baroness Morris said. Barrett -- balance between the needs of a child
16:23
Lord Nash (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Nash (Conservative)
and religious education. When I was Minister, there were a number of unregistered settings where children were attending very full-time and were attending very full-time and organisations were pleading home education as their defence. And there was no way they would have there was no way they would have enough hours in the day or energy to enough hours in the day or energy to also be homeschooled. I'd also like also be homeschooled. I'd also like to voice my support for Baroness Blower.
I'd like to ask why it is Blower. I'd like to ask why it is necessary to have these powers and these changes in the bill because it these changes in the bill because it five years as Minister, in no time five years as Minister, in no time did I feel I needed more powers than the ones in this group are the ones the ones in this group are the ones we will discuss later to sort out problems. We do now know why these problems.
We do now know why these powers are in the bill. If we don't know whether necessary, then that is know whether necessary, then that is because the unions... We were told yesterday at the TUC conference. I admire her honesty about the matter. Now, the unions have made a number of excellent comments recently about the dangers of smart phones and social media because they know they are creating considerable problems for children and their members in schools and the fact they have been so strongly spoken on this is very impressive.
And I commend them for that. But I would suggest that certainly my perception that there are still very anti-academies is out of date. It is quite clear that a teacher in Multi-Academy Trusts has far greater career progression opportunities, far greater CPD and former support than they could possibly have in a state school. I would just invite the house to consider antipathy for academies in this context of the career progression and support for their teachers. Of course, these powers are also not a power grab by the Secretary of State but also by civil servants and I personally think academies are a far better place to decide how to run their schools then micromanaging from Whitehall.
And we know that mass accommodation post 2010 was not well-managed -- mass They might be very experienced but they might remark they won't be there forever. -- But they won't be there forever. I do believe that handing so much power to officials is dangerous and I think the government will be better off to leave things as they are because they are working perfectly well and we all have funding agreements, we all understand the deal. Specifically, I would like to turn to amendment 436B and the close to do with premises.
If the school wanted to change the use of the classroom from teaching pupils and change that to a crash or nursery, they would have to ask the Department for education. Really? Is Department for education. Really? Is that really what is meant? I'd like to ask the noble Lady to clarify.
I'd like to ask why it is Blower. I'd like to ask why it is necessary to have these powers and these changes in the bill because it these changes in the bill because it five years as Minister, in no time five years as Minister, in no time did I feel I needed more powers than the ones in this group are the ones the ones in this group are the ones we will discuss later to sort out problems. We do now know why these problems.
We do now know why these powers are in the bill. If we don't know whether necessary, then that is know whether necessary, then that is because the unions... We were told yesterday at the TUC conference. I admire her honesty about the matter. Now, the unions have made a number of excellent comments recently about the dangers of smart phones and social media because they know they are creating considerable problems for children and their members in schools and the fact they have been so strongly spoken on this is very impressive.
And I commend them for that. But I would suggest that certainly my perception that there are still very anti-academies is out of date. It is quite clear that a teacher in Multi-Academy Trusts has far greater career progression opportunities, far greater CPD and former support than they could possibly have in a state school. I would just invite the house to consider antipathy for academies in this context of the career progression and support for their teachers. Of course, these powers are also not a power grab by the Secretary of State but also by civil servants and I personally think academies are a far better place to decide how to run their schools then micromanaging from Whitehall.
And we know that mass accommodation post 2010 was not well-managed -- mass They might be very experienced but they might remark they won't be there forever. -- But they won't be there forever. I do believe that handing so much power to officials is dangerous and I think the government will be better off to leave things as they are because they are working perfectly well and we all have funding agreements, we all understand the deal. Specifically, I would like to turn to amendment 436B and the close to do with premises.
If the school wanted to change the use of the classroom from teaching pupils and change that to a crash or nursery, they would have to ask the Department for education. Really? Is Department for education. Really? Is that really what is meant? I'd like to ask the noble Lady to clarify.
16:26
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
I wish to speak first in support of my noble friend Baroness Barran's amendment to eliminate potential confusion between two distinct regulatory regimes. I won't repeat what others have said but I do believe that Academy funding agreements should continue to be the primary instrument for the schools. I also want to support Baroness Blackstone's amendment to strengthen the set of offences linked to operating illegal schools. Illegal schools often operate in the context of a wider community where they are intentionally enabled by the support and action of others besides the proprietor.
Alongside that, I thank my noble friend Lord Lucas for number 432 and Baroness Blackstone for her remarks. Is recognised the importance of collecting evidence in relation to unregistered schools. Thirdly, wish to speak in support of amendments 430 and 436 relating to independent school inspection. I will endeavour not to repeat what's already been said but I think I have additional couple of points to make. Things can and do go wrong in all kinds of schools for all sorts of reasons and always will.
There does need to be an inspection model that is rigorous and thorough enough to report fairly and honestly, even when the findings are profoundly uncomfortable for the school and its leaders. Such a model has existed for inspections so for all state schools and half of independent schools that are inspected by Ofsted, and I hope that will continue to be the case under the new Ofsted model. But it is hard for ISI to provide a corresponding level of rigour when it finds will problems in the school.
I do think that the ISI inspection model is best characterised as a form of peer review. Peer review is a wonderful way of providing support and advice on ways to improve at the margin, but it's not so good as a method of landing really tough messages. It is simply too hard not to soften your message, to pull your punches a bit when talking to your peers. ISI has only two full-time inspectors who must oversee all of its inspection programme.
There was once a DfE oversight mechanism for ISI but this was dropped some years ago. While the peer review model has some value and I don't want to undermine that, it is not the ideal model to underpin an effective regulatory system. In my experience, DfE now tends to Ofsted about which serious regulatory concerns have arisen and with a broadening range of schools being inspected, this is not surprising. I therefore think it is time to extend a clear and important principle that has long applied in the regulation of state schools.
For all state schools, inspection and reporting are kept separate from improvement and support work as a matter of principle, and that principle has been maintained under successive governments and is being maintained by this government. And it's a good one providing the the dividing lines are correctly drawn. I myself took an extraordinary amount of flak over the years and I realise I haven't declared my interest as a previous chief inspector. I took an extraordinary amount of flak from people who did not realise I didn't want to acknowledge that for me to turn of -- Ofsted into a school support model would have been to cut across model would have been to cut across Looking at schools who aren't already independently reviewed by Ofsted, that schools and support should sit separately from the hard job of inspection and reporting, so there is a strong logic for unbundling ISI, putting its formal inspection functions with Ofsted and leaving the supportive peer review model to be carried forward by ISI.
I think this would be a sensible step in the direction of a coherent
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and effective regulatory system. As I attempt to try to sum up
**** Possible New Speaker ****
As I attempt to try to sum up this very diverse group, I think the Baroness...
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Baroness... I am rising at the end of a very
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I am rising at the end of a very interesting group to speak in interesting group to speak in support of an amendment which has rather disappeared in the context of these important issues for which I these important issues for which I would like to strongly support which
Alongside that, I thank my noble friend Lord Lucas for number 432 and Baroness Blackstone for her remarks. Is recognised the importance of collecting evidence in relation to unregistered schools. Thirdly, wish to speak in support of amendments 430 and 436 relating to independent school inspection. I will endeavour not to repeat what's already been said but I think I have additional couple of points to make. Things can and do go wrong in all kinds of schools for all sorts of reasons and always will.
There does need to be an inspection model that is rigorous and thorough enough to report fairly and honestly, even when the findings are profoundly uncomfortable for the school and its leaders. Such a model has existed for inspections so for all state schools and half of independent schools that are inspected by Ofsted, and I hope that will continue to be the case under the new Ofsted model. But it is hard for ISI to provide a corresponding level of rigour when it finds will problems in the school.
I do think that the ISI inspection model is best characterised as a form of peer review. Peer review is a wonderful way of providing support and advice on ways to improve at the margin, but it's not so good as a method of landing really tough messages. It is simply too hard not to soften your message, to pull your punches a bit when talking to your peers. ISI has only two full-time inspectors who must oversee all of its inspection programme.
There was once a DfE oversight mechanism for ISI but this was dropped some years ago. While the peer review model has some value and I don't want to undermine that, it is not the ideal model to underpin an effective regulatory system. In my experience, DfE now tends to Ofsted about which serious regulatory concerns have arisen and with a broadening range of schools being inspected, this is not surprising. I therefore think it is time to extend a clear and important principle that has long applied in the regulation of state schools.
For all state schools, inspection and reporting are kept separate from improvement and support work as a matter of principle, and that principle has been maintained under successive governments and is being maintained by this government. And it's a good one providing the the dividing lines are correctly drawn. I myself took an extraordinary amount of flak over the years and I realise I haven't declared my interest as a previous chief inspector. I took an extraordinary amount of flak from people who did not realise I didn't want to acknowledge that for me to turn of -- Ofsted into a school support model would have been to cut across model would have been to cut across Looking at schools who aren't already independently reviewed by Ofsted, that schools and support should sit separately from the hard job of inspection and reporting, so there is a strong logic for unbundling ISI, putting its formal inspection functions with Ofsted and leaving the supportive peer review model to be carried forward by ISI.
I think this would be a sensible step in the direction of a coherent
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and effective regulatory system. As I attempt to try to sum up
**** Possible New Speaker ****
As I attempt to try to sum up this very diverse group, I think the Baroness...
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Baroness... I am rising at the end of a very
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I am rising at the end of a very interesting group to speak in interesting group to speak in support of an amendment which has rather disappeared in the context of these important issues for which I these important issues for which I would like to strongly support which
16:32
Baroness Wolf of Dulwich (Crossbench)
-
-
Baroness Wolf of Dulwich (Crossbench)
would like to strongly support which is amendment 432B. Until she table this amendment, I had not looked very carefully at clause 39. Clause $0.39 on a whole long list of things which will constitute a material change in the nature... I hope the Minister will pay attention to this amendment because is both something that will generate a lot of pointless work and it's a classic example of how in a large bill things slip through on auto drive and have slipped past.
What it says is that there will be a material change, if there's a change of buildings occupied by the institution made available for student use, which the amendment would strike, you go further down the page and you discover building means any building, any part of the building or any permanent outdoor structure and the circumstances where building is occupied and is for student use of it is routinely used. I don't expect the Minister to give me a clear on this immediately, but that means the proverbial bicycle shed if it was changed into a building in which students kept things and lockers, would constitute a material change for that institution.
I honestly think this is bonkers so I would like to draw your lordships attention to this even though it's in a group dealing with much more generally important matters and I would be grateful if we gotta reply because it is easily corrected and it seems to me that a government which is genuinely committed to reducing regulatory burdens making planning processes more easily arrived at has let something slip in a way with which I think they are all too familiar.
What it says is that there will be a material change, if there's a change of buildings occupied by the institution made available for student use, which the amendment would strike, you go further down the page and you discover building means any building, any part of the building or any permanent outdoor structure and the circumstances where building is occupied and is for student use of it is routinely used. I don't expect the Minister to give me a clear on this immediately, but that means the proverbial bicycle shed if it was changed into a building in which students kept things and lockers, would constitute a material change for that institution.
I honestly think this is bonkers so I would like to draw your lordships attention to this even though it's in a group dealing with much more generally important matters and I would be grateful if we gotta reply because it is easily corrected and it seems to me that a government which is genuinely committed to reducing regulatory burdens making planning processes more easily arrived at has let something slip in a way with which I think they are all too familiar.
16:34
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
What the noble Baroness just said, I also wanted to talk to my amendment 432 in this group and say that I think it is worth going that bit further than 434 which the noble Lady Blackstone is proposing, we're looking in the same direction, we want this to be an effective system. I would also like to lend my support to amendment 433. The practicality of understanding, in the course of getting to know a child you find things out about them and of course a decent school immediately wants to do something to provide for that child, it should not have to go through layers of bureaucracy before doing that, as my noble friend said, there should be an immediate reaction and dealing with the consequences of it afterwards.
It's important to do with the consequences, as my noble friend will remember there was an excellent school that died because it started to take on children whose SCN it did not understand -- S SE SEN. The whole school collapsed as a result. The immediate reaction to looking after one child should not get in
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the way of this process. As I was saying, this is a
It's important to do with the consequences, as my noble friend will remember there was an excellent school that died because it started to take on children whose SCN it did not understand -- S SE SEN. The whole school collapsed as a result. The immediate reaction to looking after one child should not get in
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the way of this process. As I was saying, this is a
16:35
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
As I was saying, this is a diverse group of amendments. There are one or two amendments which are one or two amendments which caught my eye. Let me congratulate them on that. That does seem some new government could quite easily make a small change on. I don't know how you do it, but I don't think you would make many enemies if you accommodated that. Schools have to be inspected and probably if you have some system that's consistent of doing that across the board, it would be helpful to all.
We have something here, the independent schools which standards have been raised, we should know what we're doing if something is designed as a school, it is functioning as a school, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is. Let's make sure they are all inspected to a similar standard. You have to have some flexibility in approach, you want to have some knowledge because of they are doing different jobs, especially in the independent sector, there will be a difference of approach needed.
Lord Lexden made one good point, that is about special education on a, it is incredibly easy to miss co-occurring conditions -- special educational. And then the one that gets labelled is not the one is causing most of the problems. I say that is a dyslexic who is worked in that field for a long time and co-occurring is almost the norm here. For people at dyspraxia, very often they are co-occurring and they will spot the dyslexia first because they check your spelling first.
They don't realise the fact that you can't write is because you haven't got the muscle memory in your arm is breaking down, but it is going through. I would suggest something that allows that change to be made is sensible. It is sensible, practical and will save the child a great deal of distress. Child first, make sure you are dealing with the child first. The inspection regime has to have some consistency, otherwise we're going to have a variety of competing groups with competing standards chasing their tails around and blaming each other.
I hope the Minister will be able to give us some assurance that we are going to a more coherent position in the future, but it has to be a coherent position which accepts that you are dealing with a variety of
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to thank all noble lords speaking in this group. Especially the noble Lady for moving Especially the noble Lady for moving 427 BA and the group considers amendments and clauses relating to
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
As I was saying, this is a diverse group of amendments. There are one or two amendments which are one or two amendments which caught my eye. Let me congratulate them on that. That does seem some new government could quite easily make a small change on. I don't know how you do it, but I don't think you would make many enemies if you accommodated that. Schools have to be inspected and probably if you have some system that's consistent of doing that across the board, it would be helpful to all.
We have something here, the independent schools which standards have been raised, we should know what we're doing if something is designed as a school, it is functioning as a school, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is. Let's make sure they are all inspected to a similar standard. You have to have some flexibility in approach, you want to have some knowledge because of they are doing different jobs, especially in the independent sector, there will be a difference of approach needed.
Lord Lexden made one good point, that is about special education on a, it is incredibly easy to miss co-occurring conditions -- special educational. And then the one that gets labelled is not the one is causing most of the problems. I say that is a dyslexic who is worked in that field for a long time and co-occurring is almost the norm here. For people at dyspraxia, very often they are co-occurring and they will spot the dyslexia first because they check your spelling first.
They don't realise the fact that you can't write is because you haven't got the muscle memory in your arm is breaking down, but it is going through. I would suggest something that allows that change to be made is sensible. It is sensible, practical and will save the child a great deal of distress. Child first, make sure you are dealing with the child first. The inspection regime has to have some consistency, otherwise we're going to have a variety of competing groups with competing standards chasing their tails around and blaming each other.
I hope the Minister will be able to give us some assurance that we are going to a more coherent position in the future, but it has to be a coherent position which accepts that you are dealing with a variety of
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to thank all noble lords speaking in this group. Especially the noble Lady for moving Especially the noble Lady for moving 427 BA and the group considers amendments and clauses relating to
16:38
Baroness Twycross, The Minister of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Twycross, The Minister of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Labour)
amendments and clauses relating to independent educational institutions and these clauses amend the regulation skills act 2008 and the regulatory regime which applies to independent schools. As Lord Addington made clear very eloquently, it's a diverse group, so please bear with me while I go through quite a lot of diverse responses. As noble lords will be aware, Academy schools are independent schools and law which is why the regulatory regime in chapter 1 of part four of the educational skills act 2008 applies them.
Among other things this means Academy schools are regulated by the independence school standards and vital issues like safeguarding are covered by the standards. Due to their state-funded status, Academy schools differ from other and dependent schools by also being accountable to the secretary of state via the contractual funding agreements. This long-standing arrangement is not intended to change, instead clauses 36 to 44 are principally intended to change how privately funded schools are regulated. Amendments 428, 429 a and 427 BA tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran and to which a number of noble Lord spoke, they considered the relationship between education skills act 2008 in Academy trusts and their schools.
These amendments would mean value parts of the act will no longer apply to Academy schools or that these powers would need to be re-created. These will be expensive and time-consuming with no immediate benefits. Amendments 431 a and four 560... And the requirement for proprietors to have guidance. It is right that we can prevent unsuitable people from running schools. We already have a robust process in place, including requiring new Academy trust shares of trustees to complete a suitability check.
Our approach is already transparent, we do not expect the process to be significantly different or burdensome under any regulations made using this power so a review is unnecessary. In response to the noble lady, the power to acquire independent school proprietors to have regard to guidance is limited to matters already covered by the independent educational institution standards in section 94 one of the education skills act 2008. It is right that academies are publicly funded schools should be required to have regard to guidance issues.
Trying to amendments 4 to 9 and 433 tabled by Lord Lexden. To which Lord Black added his support. If I understood the noble Lord's concern is firstly that the bill imposes transgression on the independent school sector and secondly represents an unnecessary bettering of their freedoms with regard to his first concern, in amendment 429, this new regulation making power is limited to standards which about matters already covered by section 94 one of the act. With regard to the second concern, and amendment 433, the current requirement is that it is a material change to any peoples of special education on the.
This is too low a threshold and is unnecessarily burdensome for institutions. Under clause 39 it will matter to the Secretary of State whether a setting is a special institution and if it is a special institution, what special education only dictators for. -- It caters for. Based on the needs of individual pupils, officials will test us further to ensure the drafting does as it is intended. I trust this gives the noble Lord and others the assurance he is seeking. Amendment 432 tabled by Lord Lucas and amendments 432 a and 434 tabled by Baroness Blackstone make changes to the suite of inspection powers to be given to Ofsted.
In response to points raised by my noble friend Baroness Whitaker, the bill contains measures to increase Ofsted's powers when investigating only the specified relevant offences, for example, suspected unregistered and therefore illegal independent schools. With regards to amendment 432, I agree with the noble Lord that unregistered independent schools are unsafe, Ofsted should have necessary powers to investigate these settings in support criminal prosecutions for those responsible. That's why the bill introduces a new suite of investigation powers available to inspectors in these situations.
These achieve the same ends as the noble lords amendments. Turning to the amendments tabled by Baroness Blackstone, I refer to by Baroness Morris and Baroness Whitaker, and noble lords, both of these amendments seek to further strengthen the new investigator regime. In the Met 432 a introduces two new offences in this area, these may criminalise a landlord who is wholly unaware that there property is being used for illegal purposes, or a parent who innocently pitches in to support the running of a school which is not registered.
The existing offence in this area of conducting is already in our view broad and should capture and support our aid of prosecuting anyone running, controlling or managing an illegal school. Amendment 434 would allow the inspector to search any premises without a warrant. While I understand my noble friends concerns, this would be too intrusive in our view. The bill already strikes a good balance between allowing inspectors to act as they deem appropriate while introducing necessary safeguards which protect the rights of those subject to the investigation.
Amendments 432B and 433 a, both in the name of Baroness Barran, make changes to clause 39. I thought it might be helpful if I outline why the government believed clause 39 is necessary. A setting seeking to register as a new private schools tested against the independent school standards. The noble Lady asked specific questions about whether schools would need to apply for material change if they added a for material change if they added a bike shed. To be clear we want the focus to be on buildings we commonly used by pupils and therefore the places where problems might often arise will stop with example setting pupils and entirely appropriate buildings, including billings with dangerous chemicals, exposed wiring, where the public can enter freely and in a state of disrepair.
Officials are testing current drafting in relation to the point on bike sheds to ensure its scope is not overly broad, ensures the focus is on the buildings that will be commonly used by pupils and therefore the places where risks might often arise. A change of the school's registered address is a material change requiring notification, however if a school does not change its registered address it is currently not a material change to change what buildings are occupied for student use.
This means there's no prior assurance that new buildings aren't. We see examples of independent schools being inspected were children are found in buildings entirely unsuitable for education. entirely unsuitable for education. The aim is for this to be a targeted measure. I do understand and recognise the noble Lady's concerns that the drafting is too broad and officials will test the current drafting. Ensuring that children are in safe and suitable premises is an important and necessary measure and one with which I'm confident the noble Lady agrees.
Amendment 443A... I can confirm that existing guidance will be updated to help understand the new regime. Finally, I turned to the new regime. Finally, I turned to amendments 430 and 436 to which other noble Lords offered support. The ISI is a body that inspects independent schools. The collective aim of these amendments is to withdraw approval from ISI and move it to Ofsted. While I understand the concerns that have been raised, these changes would be a substantial cost at a time when Ofsted is already managing complex reform.
In response to her question, DfE does have competence in ISI's performance. I do not have a record of complaints but I will write to the noble Lady to provide these. I hope I have given necessary assurances that the measures in the bill are needed and I ask the noble Lords to kindly withdraw their amendments. Finally, I turn to amendment D4. In some cases, this could include a requirement decision could include a requirement decision if the commission was in some way and say.
This power will be used in extremely rare circumstances. The legislation is a draft to allow -- prioritise children's welfare. Allowing boarding to continue would permit an orderly return home for those children. This minor amendment ensures that in cases like this, it is not an offence to provide activity necessary for the welfare of borders. Example to allow schools to continue to provide meals. This amendment removes any ambiguity as to why this would be allowed. A victim of this amendment.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm very grateful to the noble Baroness for her answer to my Baroness for her answer to my amendment but would she add to the many helpful things she said to help drift Baroness Blackstone's drift Baroness Blackstone's amendments and mine to see if he amendments and mine to see if he agrees with what was said because listening to him on several occasions, I have the impression that he might not.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Yes, we can do that.
Among other things this means Academy schools are regulated by the independence school standards and vital issues like safeguarding are covered by the standards. Due to their state-funded status, Academy schools differ from other and dependent schools by also being accountable to the secretary of state via the contractual funding agreements. This long-standing arrangement is not intended to change, instead clauses 36 to 44 are principally intended to change how privately funded schools are regulated. Amendments 428, 429 a and 427 BA tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran and to which a number of noble Lord spoke, they considered the relationship between education skills act 2008 in Academy trusts and their schools.
These amendments would mean value parts of the act will no longer apply to Academy schools or that these powers would need to be re-created. These will be expensive and time-consuming with no immediate benefits. Amendments 431 a and four 560... And the requirement for proprietors to have guidance. It is right that we can prevent unsuitable people from running schools. We already have a robust process in place, including requiring new Academy trust shares of trustees to complete a suitability check.
Our approach is already transparent, we do not expect the process to be significantly different or burdensome under any regulations made using this power so a review is unnecessary. In response to the noble lady, the power to acquire independent school proprietors to have regard to guidance is limited to matters already covered by the independent educational institution standards in section 94 one of the education skills act 2008. It is right that academies are publicly funded schools should be required to have regard to guidance issues.
Trying to amendments 4 to 9 and 433 tabled by Lord Lexden. To which Lord Black added his support. If I understood the noble Lord's concern is firstly that the bill imposes transgression on the independent school sector and secondly represents an unnecessary bettering of their freedoms with regard to his first concern, in amendment 429, this new regulation making power is limited to standards which about matters already covered by section 94 one of the act. With regard to the second concern, and amendment 433, the current requirement is that it is a material change to any peoples of special education on the.
This is too low a threshold and is unnecessarily burdensome for institutions. Under clause 39 it will matter to the Secretary of State whether a setting is a special institution and if it is a special institution, what special education only dictators for. -- It caters for. Based on the needs of individual pupils, officials will test us further to ensure the drafting does as it is intended. I trust this gives the noble Lord and others the assurance he is seeking. Amendment 432 tabled by Lord Lucas and amendments 432 a and 434 tabled by Baroness Blackstone make changes to the suite of inspection powers to be given to Ofsted.
In response to points raised by my noble friend Baroness Whitaker, the bill contains measures to increase Ofsted's powers when investigating only the specified relevant offences, for example, suspected unregistered and therefore illegal independent schools. With regards to amendment 432, I agree with the noble Lord that unregistered independent schools are unsafe, Ofsted should have necessary powers to investigate these settings in support criminal prosecutions for those responsible. That's why the bill introduces a new suite of investigation powers available to inspectors in these situations.
These achieve the same ends as the noble lords amendments. Turning to the amendments tabled by Baroness Blackstone, I refer to by Baroness Morris and Baroness Whitaker, and noble lords, both of these amendments seek to further strengthen the new investigator regime. In the Met 432 a introduces two new offences in this area, these may criminalise a landlord who is wholly unaware that there property is being used for illegal purposes, or a parent who innocently pitches in to support the running of a school which is not registered.
The existing offence in this area of conducting is already in our view broad and should capture and support our aid of prosecuting anyone running, controlling or managing an illegal school. Amendment 434 would allow the inspector to search any premises without a warrant. While I understand my noble friends concerns, this would be too intrusive in our view. The bill already strikes a good balance between allowing inspectors to act as they deem appropriate while introducing necessary safeguards which protect the rights of those subject to the investigation.
Amendments 432B and 433 a, both in the name of Baroness Barran, make changes to clause 39. I thought it might be helpful if I outline why the government believed clause 39 is necessary. A setting seeking to register as a new private schools tested against the independent school standards. The noble Lady asked specific questions about whether schools would need to apply for material change if they added a for material change if they added a bike shed. To be clear we want the focus to be on buildings we commonly used by pupils and therefore the places where problems might often arise will stop with example setting pupils and entirely appropriate buildings, including billings with dangerous chemicals, exposed wiring, where the public can enter freely and in a state of disrepair.
Officials are testing current drafting in relation to the point on bike sheds to ensure its scope is not overly broad, ensures the focus is on the buildings that will be commonly used by pupils and therefore the places where risks might often arise. A change of the school's registered address is a material change requiring notification, however if a school does not change its registered address it is currently not a material change to change what buildings are occupied for student use.
This means there's no prior assurance that new buildings aren't. We see examples of independent schools being inspected were children are found in buildings entirely unsuitable for education. entirely unsuitable for education. The aim is for this to be a targeted measure. I do understand and recognise the noble Lady's concerns that the drafting is too broad and officials will test the current drafting. Ensuring that children are in safe and suitable premises is an important and necessary measure and one with which I'm confident the noble Lady agrees.
Amendment 443A... I can confirm that existing guidance will be updated to help understand the new regime. Finally, I turned to the new regime. Finally, I turned to amendments 430 and 436 to which other noble Lords offered support. The ISI is a body that inspects independent schools. The collective aim of these amendments is to withdraw approval from ISI and move it to Ofsted. While I understand the concerns that have been raised, these changes would be a substantial cost at a time when Ofsted is already managing complex reform.
In response to her question, DfE does have competence in ISI's performance. I do not have a record of complaints but I will write to the noble Lady to provide these. I hope I have given necessary assurances that the measures in the bill are needed and I ask the noble Lords to kindly withdraw their amendments. Finally, I turn to amendment D4. In some cases, this could include a requirement decision could include a requirement decision if the commission was in some way and say.
This power will be used in extremely rare circumstances. The legislation is a draft to allow -- prioritise children's welfare. Allowing boarding to continue would permit an orderly return home for those children. This minor amendment ensures that in cases like this, it is not an offence to provide activity necessary for the welfare of borders. Example to allow schools to continue to provide meals. This amendment removes any ambiguity as to why this would be allowed. A victim of this amendment.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm very grateful to the noble Baroness for her answer to my Baroness for her answer to my amendment but would she add to the many helpful things she said to help drift Baroness Blackstone's drift Baroness Blackstone's amendments and mine to see if he amendments and mine to see if he agrees with what was said because listening to him on several occasions, I have the impression that he might not.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Yes, we can do that.
16:49
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Third time lucky. I'd like to thank the Minister for her remarks thank the Minister for her remarks and in particular her encouraging comments in relation to my amendment and close 39. Perhaps this is a new trend in the government response. Looking hopefully to our amendments, I will read Hansard very carefully. To be honest, noble Lady is obviously trying to be as speedy as possible, which I know the house appreciates but I did not fully follow her comments about the applicability of certain elements to the bill.
I know she talked about feepaying schools only but I need to make sure that we understand that. I make sure that we understand that. I also didn't understand still why 16-19 academies are accepted institutions and other academies are not. I can pick up those points. I'm very grateful to all other noble Lords for their amendments in this group. I think the noble Lady the Minister gave some reassurance to my friends Lord Maxton and Lord Black of Brentwood in relation to 33.
And I'm grateful to the Minister on their behalf for that. Like my noble friend, Lord Lucas, I wasn't... The noble Lady was clear in relation to illegal schools that the government's approach achieves the government's approach achieves the same as those amendments 432, 434 in particular. But as my noble friend Baroness Penn Spelman -- Baroness Spelman said, we spent a lot of time in 2022 debating that then Schools Bill, the merits of being able to inspect unregistered schools without a warrant.
So I think that there are points there and nobody will accept Lord Lucas's invitation to explore. And in relation to amendments 430 and 436, we had a very good debate and some very valid questions were raised about the Independent schools Inspectorate both in terms of having the value of having to Inspectorate and the degree of independence for the ISI. It's obviously crucial that all parents have confidence in the judgements of the Inspectorate for their schools but I was pleased to hear that the Department continues to have confidence in the ISI.
With
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendments. Is it your Lordships pleasure that these amendments be withdrawn? Amendments by leave withdrawn. The question is therefore that clause 36 question is therefore that clause 36 stand as part of the bill quarter All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. That brings us to amendment have it. That brings us to amendment 49, not moved.
49 A, Baroness 49, not moved. 49 A, Baroness Barran, not moved. That brings us to Barran, not moved. That brings us to the man amendment. The question is the man amendment. The question is the man amendment. The question is -- 431 be. The question is therefore that clause 38 stand as part of the bill. All of those in favour say, bill. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it.
After close 38, amendment 432A. Not moved. The rings is to 432A. Not moved. The rings is to close 39. 432B, Not moved. 433, Not close 39. 432B, Not moved. 433, Not moved. 433A, Not moved. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. We then go into clause 42, Baroness Blackstone, not moved. The question is therefore that clauses 43 and 44 stand as part of the bill.
That brings us on to a of the bill. That brings us on to a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
new group. After close 44, Lord Blunkett, it's your turn. I'm grateful for the support of
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm grateful for the support of my noble friends. The noble Baroness my noble friends. The noble Baroness rightly drew attention to issues that have arisen over the years that we are hopefully able to protrude. we are hopefully able to protrude. Mine is a simple amendment. I shall Mine is a simple amendment. I shall be as brief as possible. Otherwise, the committee will be sitting very
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Third time lucky. I'd like to thank the Minister for her remarks thank the Minister for her remarks and in particular her encouraging comments in relation to my amendment and close 39. Perhaps this is a new trend in the government response. Looking hopefully to our amendments, I will read Hansard very carefully. To be honest, noble Lady is obviously trying to be as speedy as possible, which I know the house appreciates but I did not fully follow her comments about the applicability of certain elements to the bill.
I know she talked about feepaying schools only but I need to make sure that we understand that. I make sure that we understand that. I also didn't understand still why 16-19 academies are accepted institutions and other academies are not. I can pick up those points. I'm very grateful to all other noble Lords for their amendments in this group. I think the noble Lady the Minister gave some reassurance to my friends Lord Maxton and Lord Black of Brentwood in relation to 33.
And I'm grateful to the Minister on their behalf for that. Like my noble friend, Lord Lucas, I wasn't... The noble Lady was clear in relation to illegal schools that the government's approach achieves the government's approach achieves the same as those amendments 432, 434 in particular. But as my noble friend Baroness Penn Spelman -- Baroness Spelman said, we spent a lot of time in 2022 debating that then Schools Bill, the merits of being able to inspect unregistered schools without a warrant.
So I think that there are points there and nobody will accept Lord Lucas's invitation to explore. And in relation to amendments 430 and 436, we had a very good debate and some very valid questions were raised about the Independent schools Inspectorate both in terms of having the value of having to Inspectorate and the degree of independence for the ISI. It's obviously crucial that all parents have confidence in the judgements of the Inspectorate for their schools but I was pleased to hear that the Department continues to have confidence in the ISI.
With
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendments. Is it your Lordships pleasure that these amendments be withdrawn? Amendments by leave withdrawn. The question is therefore that clause 36 question is therefore that clause 36 stand as part of the bill quarter All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. That brings us to amendment have it. That brings us to amendment 49, not moved.
49 A, Baroness 49, not moved. 49 A, Baroness Barran, not moved. That brings us to Barran, not moved. That brings us to the man amendment. The question is the man amendment. The question is the man amendment. The question is -- 431 be. The question is therefore that clause 38 stand as part of the bill. All of those in favour say, bill. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it.
After close 38, amendment 432A. Not moved. The rings is to 432A. Not moved. The rings is to close 39. 432B, Not moved. 433, Not close 39. 432B, Not moved. 433, Not moved. 433A, Not moved. All of those in favour say, "Content". Those in the contrary say, "Not content". The the contrary say, "Not content". The contents have it. We then go into clause 42, Baroness Blackstone, not moved. The question is therefore that clauses 43 and 44 stand as part of the bill.
That brings us on to a of the bill. That brings us on to a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
new group. After close 44, Lord Blunkett, it's your turn. I'm grateful for the support of
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm grateful for the support of my noble friends. The noble Baroness my noble friends. The noble Baroness rightly drew attention to issues that have arisen over the years that we are hopefully able to protrude. we are hopefully able to protrude. Mine is a simple amendment. I shall Mine is a simple amendment. I shall be as brief as possible. Otherwise, the committee will be sitting very
16:56
Lord Blunkett (Labour)
-
-
Lord Blunkett (Labour)
the committee will be sitting very late. Can I just take you back to 1988 when Lord Baker brought forward the legislation which started the process of what was called local management of schools. Some local education authorities had the wisdom to devolve much greater powers to free up schools to innovate. Before that they. But bringing in the national curriculum reinforce the importance of schools managing schools. The head was responsible for what took place in a school and could be held to account, so local management of schools was about accountability and where the book stopped in terms of improvement and change of standards being dramatically improved, with the support at the time of the better local authorities and Baroness Morris and I will remember that we then spent, when we were in from 97 to 2001 in the Department, trying to unlock the worst of local authorities iron grip on the throats of head teachers who are trying to get on with the job and innovate.
Back in the 80s, there had also been experiments in a number of areas of local governance, so that governing bodies were being brought into being and parents and communities were being engaged much more with their school. Many changes have taken place since but from 2001 when I was pleased and proud to be the Education and Employment Secretary, we started the process of we started the process of accommodation. -- academisation. It was intended to have a laser focus on improving standards and changing the lives of children.
In many schools that had simply let them down. The process had a life of its own over the subsequent decade and led in 2010 to a massive acceleration of separate, freestanding academies, supported by additional resources. The reason I'm going back on the history is because what then occurred was what the Inspectorate and chief inspector at the time described as atomisation, a fragmentation of the system. And quite rightly, the noble Lord, as he is now, Lord Gove recognised that this was not tenable at that we were ending up with flowers that were sometimes looming but quite a lot that needed watering and nurturing.
So the growth of Multi-Academy Trusts was a natural reversion to bringing schools together and having superstructure that could provide support. That support has grown. Some of the Multi-Academy Trusts have been supported and nurtured by members of this house and have shown precisely what can be done with the right balance of support and guidance, and sometimes rigorous intervention, but with local management of schools and heads being able to carry two responsibility. Other Multi-Academy Trusts have had a different approach, and the split between the founding and the trust board have some interesting outcomes.
The amendment 435 is very simple. If, as is quite right, we inspect local authority children's services and we inspect individual schools, we should also inspect Multi-Academy Trusts. It is not a threat, it is a promise because it will ensure that the best is highlighted and where there are problems, they are rooted out. Because if a Multi-Academy Trusts is in charge of overall funding, and of HR and in many cases have taken to themselves the power of appointments, and they are in charge of how the curriculum is developed and is applied, then of course, all those elements are about the delivery of standards for children and not to inspect makes no An unspecified moment in time, with an unspecified bill, then I'll come back and have another go.
I think the spirit of Britain at the moment and in our fractured and vexatious politics is a very simple message, just do it now. Just do it. Get on with it. So I'm appealing to the government to bring back the report, a very simple amendment of their own which I think the unite around, which will be do the sensible thing, respecting everything else in the system, let's inspect multi-academy
**** Possible New Speaker ****
trust. I assume the noble Lord would like to move his amendment.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
like to move his amendment. I thought I had at the beginning. I will happily do it again. Thank you very much. After clause 44 in search of the new clause is printed on the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
new clause is printed on the marshalled List. First of all I'd like to express my support for what Lord Ankit, the noble Blunkett has just put forward, in his amendment, many respects, the time I'm about to move the twin amendments proposed by Baroness And And development And development of And development of the And development of the principal. And development of the principal. We have a long established regulatory model focused at school level and a much more recently established regime for academies and Academy trust.
And as he says there was a separate regime for local authorities improvement, which was abolished some years ago, perhaps a abolished some years ago, perhaps a good idea, perhaps not. And the underlying model evolved in the 1980s and it was one of high 1980s and it was one of high autonomy for schools, balanced by strong accountability. It is interesting that few in English education even recognise that this comparatively high level of autonomy continues today, relative to other countries. There has been a constant push back on accountability for decades, whatever form it takes.
And there have been important changes in recent years. A powerful model of autonomous school group operation With Academy trust. And in these groups, some decisions and activities can sit at the centre, or in schools, depending on the model adopted. There is a wide range of model models from the very highly integrated through to the highly evolved. Much has flown from this model as well as inevitably problems from time to time. But regulation and oversight haven't quite caught up. Remember that for an Academy the legal entity entities the Academy trust, it is the trust that carries the legal responsibility and is properly held accountable at group level, not just at school level.
On the other hand inspection has been constrained by government policy to school level. School leaders are exceeds increasingly being held accountable for decisions and actions actually sit elsewhere in actions actually sit elsewhere in the -- MAT. They are holding a disproportionate amount of the burden compared to their bosses. DfE has been expanding and elaborating as oversight models for trust. But this does remain heavily reliant on self-reported and outcome data and it perhaps lacks some of the insight comes from expert scrutiny of MAT scrutiny and professional dialogue with MAT leaders.
I think it is widely knowledged that there does need to be more scrutiny of MATs. Outcome measures do not give enough assurance that MATs are using their
Back in the 80s, there had also been experiments in a number of areas of local governance, so that governing bodies were being brought into being and parents and communities were being engaged much more with their school. Many changes have taken place since but from 2001 when I was pleased and proud to be the Education and Employment Secretary, we started the process of we started the process of accommodation. -- academisation. It was intended to have a laser focus on improving standards and changing the lives of children.
In many schools that had simply let them down. The process had a life of its own over the subsequent decade and led in 2010 to a massive acceleration of separate, freestanding academies, supported by additional resources. The reason I'm going back on the history is because what then occurred was what the Inspectorate and chief inspector at the time described as atomisation, a fragmentation of the system. And quite rightly, the noble Lord, as he is now, Lord Gove recognised that this was not tenable at that we were ending up with flowers that were sometimes looming but quite a lot that needed watering and nurturing.
So the growth of Multi-Academy Trusts was a natural reversion to bringing schools together and having superstructure that could provide support. That support has grown. Some of the Multi-Academy Trusts have been supported and nurtured by members of this house and have shown precisely what can be done with the right balance of support and guidance, and sometimes rigorous intervention, but with local management of schools and heads being able to carry two responsibility. Other Multi-Academy Trusts have had a different approach, and the split between the founding and the trust board have some interesting outcomes.
The amendment 435 is very simple. If, as is quite right, we inspect local authority children's services and we inspect individual schools, we should also inspect Multi-Academy Trusts. It is not a threat, it is a promise because it will ensure that the best is highlighted and where there are problems, they are rooted out. Because if a Multi-Academy Trusts is in charge of overall funding, and of HR and in many cases have taken to themselves the power of appointments, and they are in charge of how the curriculum is developed and is applied, then of course, all those elements are about the delivery of standards for children and not to inspect makes no An unspecified moment in time, with an unspecified bill, then I'll come back and have another go.
I think the spirit of Britain at the moment and in our fractured and vexatious politics is a very simple message, just do it now. Just do it. Get on with it. So I'm appealing to the government to bring back the report, a very simple amendment of their own which I think the unite around, which will be do the sensible thing, respecting everything else in the system, let's inspect multi-academy
**** Possible New Speaker ****
trust. I assume the noble Lord would like to move his amendment.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
like to move his amendment. I thought I had at the beginning. I will happily do it again. Thank you very much. After clause 44 in search of the new clause is printed on the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
new clause is printed on the marshalled List. First of all I'd like to express my support for what Lord Ankit, the noble Blunkett has just put forward, in his amendment, many respects, the time I'm about to move the twin amendments proposed by Baroness And And development And development of And development of the And development of the principal. And development of the principal. We have a long established regulatory model focused at school level and a much more recently established regime for academies and Academy trust.
And as he says there was a separate regime for local authorities improvement, which was abolished some years ago, perhaps a abolished some years ago, perhaps a good idea, perhaps not. And the underlying model evolved in the 1980s and it was one of high 1980s and it was one of high autonomy for schools, balanced by strong accountability. It is interesting that few in English education even recognise that this comparatively high level of autonomy continues today, relative to other countries. There has been a constant push back on accountability for decades, whatever form it takes.
And there have been important changes in recent years. A powerful model of autonomous school group operation With Academy trust. And in these groups, some decisions and activities can sit at the centre, or in schools, depending on the model adopted. There is a wide range of model models from the very highly integrated through to the highly evolved. Much has flown from this model as well as inevitably problems from time to time. But regulation and oversight haven't quite caught up. Remember that for an Academy the legal entity entities the Academy trust, it is the trust that carries the legal responsibility and is properly held accountable at group level, not just at school level.
On the other hand inspection has been constrained by government policy to school level. School leaders are exceeds increasingly being held accountable for decisions and actions actually sit elsewhere in actions actually sit elsewhere in the -- MAT. They are holding a disproportionate amount of the burden compared to their bosses. DfE has been expanding and elaborating as oversight models for trust. But this does remain heavily reliant on self-reported and outcome data and it perhaps lacks some of the insight comes from expert scrutiny of MAT scrutiny and professional dialogue with MAT leaders.
I think it is widely knowledged that there does need to be more scrutiny of MATs. Outcome measures do not give enough assurance that MATs are using their
17:06
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
assurance that MATs are using their freedoms well to provide education with real substance and integrity and the support that enables all children to grow into resilient and children to grow into resilient and competent adults. My amendment 4 36, ZZ B, from Baroness Barran is ZZ B, from Baroness Barran is intended to draw a somewhat disparate set of provisions disparate set of provisions together, to help create a coherent regime for the regulation of Academy trust. And that sets out some clear trust.
And that sets out some clear purposes and priorities for the regulation of Academy trust. The regulation of Academy trust. The interest of children and parents, on behalf of children, of course, should still come first. One that recognises the varying structures of recognises the varying structures of trust, divisions of responsibilities within them and flexible enough to within them and flexible enough to respond appropriately. One that draws on expert insights and judgements in arriving at vigorous judgements in arriving at vigorous and will evidence decisions. One that keeps the various bodies that keeps the various bodies involved in education regulation in alignment.
DfE, Ofsted, the admissions adjudicator, others, each admissions adjudicator, others, each have their own sphere, but I think have their own sphere, but I think there is a further to go to think systemically about how to make sure that those levers are fit together, in the most effective and efficient way. And finally, as, my new friend Baroness Barran's amendment draws our attention to. It is a very important that there is the right level of transparency about this work. Of course confidence in the Can see what is being done and understand the bases with which it
**** Possible New Speaker ****
is being done. The transparency provisions are also really important and I hope it will be taken on board. I would like to speak in support
And that sets out some clear purposes and priorities for the regulation of Academy trust. The regulation of Academy trust. The interest of children and parents, on behalf of children, of course, should still come first. One that recognises the varying structures of recognises the varying structures of trust, divisions of responsibilities within them and flexible enough to within them and flexible enough to respond appropriately. One that draws on expert insights and judgements in arriving at vigorous judgements in arriving at vigorous and will evidence decisions. One that keeps the various bodies that keeps the various bodies involved in education regulation in alignment.
DfE, Ofsted, the admissions adjudicator, others, each admissions adjudicator, others, each have their own sphere, but I think have their own sphere, but I think there is a further to go to think systemically about how to make sure that those levers are fit together, in the most effective and efficient way. And finally, as, my new friend Baroness Barran's amendment draws our attention to. It is a very important that there is the right level of transparency about this work. Of course confidence in the Can see what is being done and understand the bases with which it
**** Possible New Speaker ****
is being done. The transparency provisions are also really important and I hope it will be taken on board. I would like to speak in support
17:06
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to speak in support of amendment 4 35 and my noble friend's, including Lord Blunkett. I shall run the House of my interest as the chair of the multi-academy trust. I have fought for some time it is important that we bring forward the inspection of MATs and I was therefore delighted to see as an election commitment from the Labour Party when it went into the last election. I've been looking to the government implementing that and I think it is right that this can be used as an opportunity to take powers to do that and it is then up to the Department and the government to do the necessary work, with Ofsted and to get ready for that, so that Ofsted has the expertise, within its inspectorate around how apps work.
I do not think it necessarily does consistently at the moment. We shouldn't rust at it, I have some nervousness about those that are arguing for a six month that are arguing for a six month timeline for it to be implemented -- rush at it. We should leave the timeline for government until they are confident about the expertise that exist to do it. I've also been interested in whether or not we should define the proprieties of academies and local authorities, as responsible bodies for schools, so that we can have a single inspection, a framework for both local authorities and academies, in respect of their inspection.
So that we get more consistency, across both forms of government, governance. I also think it is interesting to look at whether or not, if we are expecting those responsible bodies, inspecting mass, in this case, whether there is an opportunity for rationalisation around inspection. Good, well governed, had a good school improvement capacity. They have the capacity to support their schools that are in their trust, financially and another, procurement and all the areas and aspects of running a good schools.
And, it then ought to be possible, after Ofsted has carried out an effective inspection of a MAT on a risk-based approach to decide whether or not it needs to inspect all of the schools, in that trust. Rationalisation can then release capacity in Ofsted more consistency is one of the main complaints we have about Ofsted, in the school system is the consistency of the outcomes on inspections and I do not blame Ofsted. They have been operating within a considerable budgetary constraints, having to take their fair share of resource cuts, over the period.
And that has an impact on the consistency of inspections. The only thing we can do to increase capacity, surely welcome. I will also say that I think this goes to the importance of governments, Secretary of State and the noble Lord blanket alluded to. I don't think it properly appreciated that one of the key successes of the academies I ever saw when I was the Academy's Minister under the previous Labour government was around governance around having individuals like Lord Hash, like Lord and you putting their name to a multi-academy trust.
Putting their reputations on the line and ensuring that the governments were strong. -- Governance. In those Gove reforms we had rapid expansion without seriously focusing on whether or not the government was improving alongside it. I would also encourage the government as part of thinking about this to review the governance of multi-academy trust to ensure that we can have a good consistency as we expand the number of MATs and we seek to improve, their own improvement capacity. As part of that I'll ask them to look at the appointment and the term of office of the members of academies stop one of the things that I'm interested in.
The originals, the members of the cause, a fine wonderful people and I thank them for their service, but they are self appointed and they are appointed for as long as they want to do the job. It is a slightly odd arrangement, they, then, the people I'm accountable to as the people I'm accountable to as the people I'm accountable to as the chair of the trust and I find it strange that they are then, their account to be accountability internally is questionable.
I would be interested, as a solution, that the local authorities, within the MAT operate should be the people who appoint the members and then the trust board, or Academy board. Not for the comer to the local authorities, the authorities and operating schools, through the trust. But the governance is accountable to local authorities and I think that would bring better consistency and better accountancy into the system. On that basis I would support my noble friend Lord I would like to support the overall principle of this group.
There are three interesting amendments, they are slightly different and I am sure that Ministers, if they are ready to agree this, it does reflect on the government's manifesto in a way. I do think the overall principle will actually and I think it is a sign of the maturity of the Academy trust system that actually governments, or the way that multi-academy trust are working should be in inspected. Whether that is done alongside schools, the schools are inspected
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to speak in support of amendment 4 35 and my noble friend's, including Lord Blunkett. I shall run the House of my interest as the chair of the multi-academy trust. I have fought for some time it is important that we bring forward the inspection of MATs and I was therefore delighted to see as an election commitment from the Labour Party when it went into the last election. I've been looking to the government implementing that and I think it is right that this can be used as an opportunity to take powers to do that and it is then up to the Department and the government to do the necessary work, with Ofsted and to get ready for that, so that Ofsted has the expertise, within its inspectorate around how apps work.
I do not think it necessarily does consistently at the moment. We shouldn't rust at it, I have some nervousness about those that are arguing for a six month that are arguing for a six month timeline for it to be implemented -- rush at it. We should leave the timeline for government until they are confident about the expertise that exist to do it. I've also been interested in whether or not we should define the proprieties of academies and local authorities, as responsible bodies for schools, so that we can have a single inspection, a framework for both local authorities and academies, in respect of their inspection.
So that we get more consistency, across both forms of government, governance. I also think it is interesting to look at whether or not, if we are expecting those responsible bodies, inspecting mass, in this case, whether there is an opportunity for rationalisation around inspection. Good, well governed, had a good school improvement capacity. They have the capacity to support their schools that are in their trust, financially and another, procurement and all the areas and aspects of running a good schools.
And, it then ought to be possible, after Ofsted has carried out an effective inspection of a MAT on a risk-based approach to decide whether or not it needs to inspect all of the schools, in that trust. Rationalisation can then release capacity in Ofsted more consistency is one of the main complaints we have about Ofsted, in the school system is the consistency of the outcomes on inspections and I do not blame Ofsted. They have been operating within a considerable budgetary constraints, having to take their fair share of resource cuts, over the period.
And that has an impact on the consistency of inspections. The only thing we can do to increase capacity, surely welcome. I will also say that I think this goes to the importance of governments, Secretary of State and the noble Lord blanket alluded to. I don't think it properly appreciated that one of the key successes of the academies I ever saw when I was the Academy's Minister under the previous Labour government was around governance around having individuals like Lord Hash, like Lord and you putting their name to a multi-academy trust.
Putting their reputations on the line and ensuring that the governments were strong. -- Governance. In those Gove reforms we had rapid expansion without seriously focusing on whether or not the government was improving alongside it. I would also encourage the government as part of thinking about this to review the governance of multi-academy trust to ensure that we can have a good consistency as we expand the number of MATs and we seek to improve, their own improvement capacity. As part of that I'll ask them to look at the appointment and the term of office of the members of academies stop one of the things that I'm interested in.
The originals, the members of the cause, a fine wonderful people and I thank them for their service, but they are self appointed and they are appointed for as long as they want to do the job. It is a slightly odd arrangement, they, then, the people I'm accountable to as the people I'm accountable to as the people I'm accountable to as the chair of the trust and I find it strange that they are then, their account to be accountability internally is questionable.
I would be interested, as a solution, that the local authorities, within the MAT operate should be the people who appoint the members and then the trust board, or Academy board. Not for the comer to the local authorities, the authorities and operating schools, through the trust. But the governance is accountable to local authorities and I think that would bring better consistency and better accountancy into the system. On that basis I would support my noble friend Lord I would like to support the overall principle of this group.
There are three interesting amendments, they are slightly different and I am sure that Ministers, if they are ready to agree this, it does reflect on the government's manifesto in a way. I do think the overall principle will actually and I think it is a sign of the maturity of the Academy trust system that actually governments, or the way that multi-academy trust are working should be in inspected. Whether that is done alongside schools, the schools are inspected
17:13
Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Non-affiliated)
-
-
Baroness Morgan of Cotes (Non-affiliated)
and questions are asked about the trust. That is perhaps open for trust. That is perhaps open for discussion. I do support the overall support was that the buck stops support was that the buck stops here. In the last group I used the phrase who was calling the shots? phrase who was calling the shots? Both with the same point, it is all about accountability. And all the conversations I've had with multi- academy trust leaders, in preparation for proceedings on this bill, they are confident, they are bill, they are confident, they are confident about the education they are offering.
They are confident are offering. They are confident about the schools that they are running, the standards they are setting and as we are going to discuss, whether we get to the group discuss, whether we get to the group today, or not, we talk about school improvement. The reality is that the capacity for school improvement, in England, sits with a multi-academy England, sits with a multi-academy trust. They know a lot about the education system and therefore I do education system and therefore I do not think that they would be put off by being inspected now.
Of course, what you don't want to do is to cut what you don't want to do is to cut across a other regulator that the multi-academy trust are already governed by. I think particularly, governed by. I think particularly, many of the multi-academy trust are regulated by Companies House. They regulated by Companies House. They will be producing accounts that they will be accountable in that way. I think there is a scene for this legislation to be wary of greeting. You could ask the right questions.
I also think that the noble Lord night has raised a very interesting question about local authority. I think what he was talking about was the inspection of local authorities, in terms of maybe they are in the same position as multi-academy trust. The consistency of inspection, which I was looking for in the last group. Slightly disappointed, unsuspectingly by the answer I've had from the government, Frontbencher Matt. I do think that consistency in accountability and the understanding to say who is really responsible for the education is an important.
I'm very pleased to see both that the Baroness Barran is fields amendment and the support in a moment from the noble Baroness, Baroness Barran and I should be very interested to see how the government takes this overall possibility forward. I'm sure that the debate about it. I'm sure we will disagree on some things. It is now a sign of the maturity of the multi-academy trust system which is, I think, to be welcomed and debating in the next
**** Possible New Speaker ****
few groups. Can I also support this group of amendments. Particularly amendment
They are confident are offering. They are confident about the schools that they are running, the standards they are setting and as we are going to discuss, whether we get to the group discuss, whether we get to the group today, or not, we talk about school improvement. The reality is that the capacity for school improvement, in England, sits with a multi-academy England, sits with a multi-academy trust. They know a lot about the education system and therefore I do education system and therefore I do not think that they would be put off by being inspected now.
Of course, what you don't want to do is to cut what you don't want to do is to cut across a other regulator that the multi-academy trust are already governed by. I think particularly, governed by. I think particularly, many of the multi-academy trust are regulated by Companies House. They regulated by Companies House. They will be producing accounts that they will be accountable in that way. I think there is a scene for this legislation to be wary of greeting. You could ask the right questions.
I also think that the noble Lord night has raised a very interesting question about local authority. I think what he was talking about was the inspection of local authorities, in terms of maybe they are in the same position as multi-academy trust. The consistency of inspection, which I was looking for in the last group. Slightly disappointed, unsuspectingly by the answer I've had from the government, Frontbencher Matt. I do think that consistency in accountability and the understanding to say who is really responsible for the education is an important.
I'm very pleased to see both that the Baroness Barran is fields amendment and the support in a moment from the noble Baroness, Baroness Barran and I should be very interested to see how the government takes this overall possibility forward. I'm sure that the debate about it. I'm sure we will disagree on some things. It is now a sign of the maturity of the multi-academy trust system which is, I think, to be welcomed and debating in the next
**** Possible New Speaker ****
few groups. Can I also support this group of amendments. Particularly amendment
17:15
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
amendments. Particularly amendment to 435. I think, I'm delighted to hear the support for inspection multi-academy trust across the House. I've never understand a single argument against it and we will be discussing this for probably 5 to 10 years. I've never even been a bit persuaded by any of the arguments stop if we have got to that point, where there is cross- party agreement on this, then it needs to be done, that is to be welcomed. And they are very important part of our school system.
And I think we have tried over 30 years of reform to give freedoms to schools, but hold them accountable through results and through inspection, through regulation. There is just no argument for leaving a multi Academy trust out of that picture. So that is good. I think the Amendment four 35 is very straightforward. I worry about primary legislation and details. That is really guaranteed will never do anything. We will start arguing over the details. I think we have learnt enough inspection and holding other educational institutions to account, to work it out and either secondary legislation or guidance.
Under 436, ZZ B. I just wanted to Under 436, ZZ B. I just wanted to The words they must prioritise mats. I warn against not putting that in primary legislation because I remember sitting on that side of the chamber when the previous Conservative government trying to do something similar in the inspection of schools that they tried to prioritise those schools that were struggling, what they did was not inspect schools that were good or outstanding for six years. It was an utter disaster.
By the time the inspection came round again huge number of those schools where in special measures and really failing and letting down children. I think we've learnt the lesson, you can't prioritise like that other than within one inspection cycle, but to put that in primary legislation implies that good mats won't get inspected, I would be absolutely against that, we have to inspect them because school improvement improves and then declines, that's the nature of the beast. We also have to inspect them because we need to look at outstanding institutions as a means and the yardstick for looking at all institutions.
If you only inspect institutions that are good, that becomes the norm and you forget to inspect them against outstanding institutions. All those reasons I very much in favour of amendment 435 moved by Lord Blunkett and would warn against putting too much detail into the bill. The only other thing I want to say was on Lord Knight's comments about responsible body. I've spoken with him so 'New York Times' and started a sceptic been -- but been worn down and now think it's a good idea.
To some extent I think it's the right place for implementation is this bill because the Minister will tell if I'm wrong but what I sent the bill is trying to do is allow each of our different types of schools to retain their difference and to play to their strengths. And not have to compromise on that. But be brought into an overall framework so we have a unified school system. I think the idea of having a responsible body achieves that in governance.
Local authority and multi-academy trust, single Academy or whatever could be a responsible body. I would also get the that word did not proprietor which has never understood and don't think ought to be legislation. I'm saying I think the time has come in our consideration of governance and inspection of governance in our school system to look very seriously at Lord Knight's suggestion for having responsible bodies. I'm not sure he's put that in amendment so
**** Possible New Speaker ****
we look on the good grace of the Minister perhaps for that. I like to speak strongly in the defence of Lord Blunkett of his defence of Lord Blunkett of his amendment 435 and supported by amendment 435 and supported by Baroness Barran's Spielman. It's long overdue, when I was the Minister in 2017 first thing I try Minister in 2017 first thing I try to do and I ran into a turf war between OFSTED and the Department, simple as that. To Baroness Morris as question why hasn't anything been as question why hasn't anything been done about it well because the bureaucrats were fighting each other.
The excuse then was there weren't sufficient financial skills and OFSTED to look at the financial and OFSTED to look at the financial framework and capability, I think that's nonsense. I think we could train a small number of OFSTED inspectors very quickly to understand the basic intervals, for example 1 of the big advantages of multi-academy trusts is when you essentially have one bank account, only about 1/3 of mats do that, I'm only about 1/3 of mats do that, I'm a huge fan of it I don't think Lord Nash is that's fine, that's part of the flexibility that system has created.
The OFSTED inspector would created. The OFSTED inspector would need to understand that. To Lord Knight's point about it being a
And I think we have tried over 30 years of reform to give freedoms to schools, but hold them accountable through results and through inspection, through regulation. There is just no argument for leaving a multi Academy trust out of that picture. So that is good. I think the Amendment four 35 is very straightforward. I worry about primary legislation and details. That is really guaranteed will never do anything. We will start arguing over the details. I think we have learnt enough inspection and holding other educational institutions to account, to work it out and either secondary legislation or guidance.
Under 436, ZZ B. I just wanted to Under 436, ZZ B. I just wanted to The words they must prioritise mats. I warn against not putting that in primary legislation because I remember sitting on that side of the chamber when the previous Conservative government trying to do something similar in the inspection of schools that they tried to prioritise those schools that were struggling, what they did was not inspect schools that were good or outstanding for six years. It was an utter disaster.
By the time the inspection came round again huge number of those schools where in special measures and really failing and letting down children. I think we've learnt the lesson, you can't prioritise like that other than within one inspection cycle, but to put that in primary legislation implies that good mats won't get inspected, I would be absolutely against that, we have to inspect them because school improvement improves and then declines, that's the nature of the beast. We also have to inspect them because we need to look at outstanding institutions as a means and the yardstick for looking at all institutions.
If you only inspect institutions that are good, that becomes the norm and you forget to inspect them against outstanding institutions. All those reasons I very much in favour of amendment 435 moved by Lord Blunkett and would warn against putting too much detail into the bill. The only other thing I want to say was on Lord Knight's comments about responsible body. I've spoken with him so 'New York Times' and started a sceptic been -- but been worn down and now think it's a good idea.
To some extent I think it's the right place for implementation is this bill because the Minister will tell if I'm wrong but what I sent the bill is trying to do is allow each of our different types of schools to retain their difference and to play to their strengths. And not have to compromise on that. But be brought into an overall framework so we have a unified school system. I think the idea of having a responsible body achieves that in governance.
Local authority and multi-academy trust, single Academy or whatever could be a responsible body. I would also get the that word did not proprietor which has never understood and don't think ought to be legislation. I'm saying I think the time has come in our consideration of governance and inspection of governance in our school system to look very seriously at Lord Knight's suggestion for having responsible bodies. I'm not sure he's put that in amendment so
**** Possible New Speaker ****
we look on the good grace of the Minister perhaps for that. I like to speak strongly in the defence of Lord Blunkett of his defence of Lord Blunkett of his amendment 435 and supported by amendment 435 and supported by Baroness Barran's Spielman. It's long overdue, when I was the Minister in 2017 first thing I try Minister in 2017 first thing I try to do and I ran into a turf war between OFSTED and the Department, simple as that. To Baroness Morris as question why hasn't anything been as question why hasn't anything been done about it well because the bureaucrats were fighting each other.
The excuse then was there weren't sufficient financial skills and OFSTED to look at the financial and OFSTED to look at the financial framework and capability, I think that's nonsense. I think we could train a small number of OFSTED inspectors very quickly to understand the basic intervals, for example 1 of the big advantages of multi-academy trusts is when you essentially have one bank account, only about 1/3 of mats do that, I'm only about 1/3 of mats do that, I'm a huge fan of it I don't think Lord Nash is that's fine, that's part of the flexibility that system has created.
The OFSTED inspector would created. The OFSTED inspector would need to understand that. To Lord Knight's point about it being a
17:20
Lord Agnew of Oulton (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Agnew of Oulton (Conservative)
Knight's point about it being a resource free upper I think I agree, in three years since I've been back as chairman I trust that had to sit through 12 interviews with OFSTED inspectors, 80% of what I tell them is Gulacsi the same every single time, we have a joined up curriculum across the whole trust, we have gagged pooling of all the money, it's all happening at the heart and brain is at the centre, so wasting time going round all these peripheral schools whether going to get the same answer time after time is a tremendous waste of time.
Go to the centre, if you are then worried about the messaging you'll get the data you're inspecting then go into a deep dive around the individual schools. But if you did a single mat inspection every three years you wouldn't have to go into every single school. I really can't understand why they wouldn't be huge support would be wonderful if we could bring the House together with Lord Blunkett, Baroness Barran and have an amendment which the Minister can work with, because I can promise you everyone.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
My noble friend runs good Academy trust where things are not so good you can get a lot of variability you can get a lot of variability between schools that append themselves to a trust so this has to be something judged on the occasion
Go to the centre, if you are then worried about the messaging you'll get the data you're inspecting then go into a deep dive around the individual schools. But if you did a single mat inspection every three years you wouldn't have to go into every single school. I really can't understand why they wouldn't be huge support would be wonderful if we could bring the House together with Lord Blunkett, Baroness Barran and have an amendment which the Minister can work with, because I can promise you everyone.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
My noble friend runs good Academy trust where things are not so good you can get a lot of variability you can get a lot of variability between schools that append themselves to a trust so this has to be something judged on the occasion
17:21
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
be something judged on the occasion can't just say inspect if it isn't functioning well, the outside can really be difficult. Add a couple of thoughts, I don't like the idea from noble Lord Lord Knight of local authorities appointing, I think the way you gather people together as you have someone review excellent people in the middle who want other excellent people around them. Then you have OFSTED or whoever to say is this working. Local authorities just tend to appoint anybody they don't turn up the don't know enough, it's where I've seen local authorities appointing boards it has been
**** Possible New Speaker ****
uniformly a disaster. I'm not suggesting local authorities appoint the boards, I'm authorities appoint the boards, I'm suggesting they appoint the members who effectively other shareholders
**** Possible New Speaker ****
who effectively other shareholders that the boards have to report to on a manual basis at the annual general meeting. Yes but you still want response
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Yes but you still want response over interested access people there and that's not what you get in my and that's not what you get in my experience. Secondly I really hope inspection will look at the inspection will look at the connection that parents can be hugely different across mats. Some parents have a real connection with parents have a real connection with the school, the school does that interface very well. Others anything parent is worried about just parent is worried about just disappears into the fog of a distant matter and they never really know matter and they never really know how to work with it.
A good mat will be working well with parents and OFSTED ought to look at it.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
OFSTED ought to look at it. I rise to speak in favour of amendment 435 to which I have added amendment 435 to which I have added my name and I'm also happy to signify support for amendment 436 ZZ be less enthusiastically than ZZ a because I think it's rather
**** Possible New Speaker ****
uniformly a disaster. I'm not suggesting local authorities appoint the boards, I'm authorities appoint the boards, I'm suggesting they appoint the members who effectively other shareholders
**** Possible New Speaker ****
who effectively other shareholders that the boards have to report to on a manual basis at the annual general meeting. Yes but you still want response
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Yes but you still want response over interested access people there and that's not what you get in my and that's not what you get in my experience. Secondly I really hope inspection will look at the inspection will look at the connection that parents can be hugely different across mats. Some parents have a real connection with parents have a real connection with the school, the school does that interface very well. Others anything parent is worried about just parent is worried about just disappears into the fog of a distant matter and they never really know matter and they never really know how to work with it.
A good mat will be working well with parents and OFSTED ought to look at it.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
OFSTED ought to look at it. I rise to speak in favour of amendment 435 to which I have added amendment 435 to which I have added my name and I'm also happy to signify support for amendment 436 ZZ be less enthusiastically than ZZ a because I think it's rather
17:23
Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Labour)
-
-
Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Labour)
because I think it's rather bureaucratic, but I would object if the opportunity came to vote against it. Also very welcome is the unanimity of view across the House on this issue. Because it is an issue of basically accountability, Academies Academies are Academies are very Academies are very important Academies are very important part Academies are very important part of the school system, I've no connection with academies like other members who have spoken other than the parent of a child currently in year 10 of the school in the multi- academy trust in London.
I think it's important that we have an insight as to what is happening within trusts to a much greater extent that we have at the moment because there is a gap, fundamental gap in the accountability system for school education, if schools are inspected Children's Services are inspected why not multi-academy trusts? I think there is a need for that reason for transparency, for consistency, for fairness. OFSTED I believe need to have the power to inspect trusts governance, financial stewardship, curriculum content, teacher development and how trust level ethos affects children across the academies because there are some tales of the way in which certain trusts operate which are not I don't think, do not look good in terms of some of the pressure under which children are placed.
I think good MAT's should welcome this and I think they will welcome this. I don't need to add further to what friends of sad because, noble Lord friends of sad because, noble Lord have said because there is very little to add. This is a Labour manifesto commitment as Lord Knight said, really what I would say to the Minister, if not now, when? I hope the answer is report. the answer is report.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Could I support very strongly the amendment by my noble friend, I call him a friend, Lord Blunkett, because him a friend, Lord Blunkett, because we were both born the same response villages in the past and it looks as if his proposal has all-party if his proposal has all-party support in the House, that is very rare in education I can assure your Lordships, very very rare indeed. Multi-academy trusts were created Multi-academy trusts were created some years ago because of the
I think it's important that we have an insight as to what is happening within trusts to a much greater extent that we have at the moment because there is a gap, fundamental gap in the accountability system for school education, if schools are inspected Children's Services are inspected why not multi-academy trusts? I think there is a need for that reason for transparency, for consistency, for fairness. OFSTED I believe need to have the power to inspect trusts governance, financial stewardship, curriculum content, teacher development and how trust level ethos affects children across the academies because there are some tales of the way in which certain trusts operate which are not I don't think, do not look good in terms of some of the pressure under which children are placed.
I think good MAT's should welcome this and I think they will welcome this. I don't need to add further to what friends of sad because, noble Lord friends of sad because, noble Lord have said because there is very little to add. This is a Labour manifesto commitment as Lord Knight said, really what I would say to the Minister, if not now, when? I hope the answer is report. the answer is report.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Could I support very strongly the amendment by my noble friend, I call him a friend, Lord Blunkett, because him a friend, Lord Blunkett, because we were both born the same response villages in the past and it looks as if his proposal has all-party if his proposal has all-party support in the House, that is very rare in education I can assure your Lordships, very very rare indeed. Multi-academy trusts were created Multi-academy trusts were created some years ago because of the
17:26
Lord Baker of Dorking (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Baker of Dorking (Conservative)
success. There were so many private schools hitherto controlled by local authorities who understood money, many independent schools didn't have much understanding of money, not until they got their budgets. So there was an institution needed to sit between the Department of education and the educational world of schools, particularly as many people in the Department of education who served it as a minister or Secretary of State knows not many people in a department have actually run a school, it's not their particular skill.
They have other skills in other matters, but not in running a school. So I had some experience of it because schools which I'm responsible, scheduled colleges for which there are now 44 with over 21,000 students, many of these are now members of multi-academy trusts, in members of multi-academy trusts, in fact two thirds of them. This is quite challenging for the trust because we are not an ordinary secondary school like the other ones which they control, we only go from 14 to 18 and we tend to have a longer working day and a short holiday, but the two days a week the 14 role that is 40 % of the time will be spent in workshops or in visiting companies or in learning how to use machinery.
So they are very different from the other secondary schools in the multi- academy trust. Initially I was concerned that multi-academy trusts would not recognise the differences, but in my experience they have. I think we have only had one difficulty with one of them where all the other schools in the trust were primary schools so there was not a great deal of experience running a secondary school. I also discovered that the chairman of the multi-academy trust are sometimes very able people, not quite as able as Lord Knight or experienced as Lord Knight, but they have a need, important Responsibility for handling money.
I remember how strongly Lord Agnew spent a very long days trying to teach financial control to schools directly. To ensure that they understood how to control their budgets and to get the best out of their budgets. The best Academy trusts do this. So I think they have now become part of institution and I can see no reason why they should not be inspected. They are not really directly responsible to anybody, I expect the Secretary of State but not many Secretaries of State will spend many times actually worrying about how they are run, so I think we are very -- it would be a good idea to have a system of education for them and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
therefore I support that amendment. I rise to support the amendments in the name of Baroness Barran. And in the name of Baroness Barran. And Baroness Billingham. I support the sentiment behind us Mike Baroness sentiment behind us Mike Baroness Spielman. I believe we shouldn't rush to this because OFSTED
They have other skills in other matters, but not in running a school. So I had some experience of it because schools which I'm responsible, scheduled colleges for which there are now 44 with over 21,000 students, many of these are now members of multi-academy trusts, in members of multi-academy trusts, in fact two thirds of them. This is quite challenging for the trust because we are not an ordinary secondary school like the other ones which they control, we only go from 14 to 18 and we tend to have a longer working day and a short holiday, but the two days a week the 14 role that is 40 % of the time will be spent in workshops or in visiting companies or in learning how to use machinery.
So they are very different from the other secondary schools in the multi- academy trust. Initially I was concerned that multi-academy trusts would not recognise the differences, but in my experience they have. I think we have only had one difficulty with one of them where all the other schools in the trust were primary schools so there was not a great deal of experience running a secondary school. I also discovered that the chairman of the multi-academy trust are sometimes very able people, not quite as able as Lord Knight or experienced as Lord Knight, but they have a need, important Responsibility for handling money.
I remember how strongly Lord Agnew spent a very long days trying to teach financial control to schools directly. To ensure that they understood how to control their budgets and to get the best out of their budgets. The best Academy trusts do this. So I think they have now become part of institution and I can see no reason why they should not be inspected. They are not really directly responsible to anybody, I expect the Secretary of State but not many Secretaries of State will spend many times actually worrying about how they are run, so I think we are very -- it would be a good idea to have a system of education for them and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
therefore I support that amendment. I rise to support the amendments in the name of Baroness Barran. And in the name of Baroness Barran. And Baroness Billingham. I support the sentiment behind us Mike Baroness sentiment behind us Mike Baroness Spielman. I believe we shouldn't rush to this because OFSTED
17:29
Lord Nash (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Nash (Conservative)
rush to this because OFSTED inspectors will need some training on this, many of them don't really understand maths -- MAT is and I worry about organisational structures more the results that count and education outcomes and the support from the centre and personal development safeguard in, careers, enrichment et cetera. And of course it's fairly easy to inspect value for money by reference to comparable statistics, that something that could certainly be done. In principle I support this concept and I welcome it, Lord Blunkett's very
**** Possible New Speaker ****
eloquent intervention. All-party support in the House of Lords and education we should
**** Possible New Speaker ****
eloquent intervention. All-party support in the House of Lords and education we should
17:30
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
Lords and education we should probably run with it. You have got in this occasion. The Minister, we've got a major party education system which we are not looking at, that's the Academy trust or inspector properly. There are some successes, there are some that aren't doing as well but that is inevitable, but it is an accepted part of the system now. We really should be having a look at what should be having a look at what My question to the Minister, if not now, then weigh in.
-- Then went. Giving us an idea of the structure and when it is coming and would be very helpful. Because it is a very important part of the structure, whether we are actually going to accept that, with a sigh or a smile, it doesn't matter it is there and we should be inspecting it. I look forward to hearing what the government plans are in this department very soon. department very soon.
-- Then went. Giving us an idea of the structure and when it is coming and would be very helpful. Because it is a very important part of the structure, whether we are actually going to accept that, with a sigh or a smile, it doesn't matter it is there and we should be inspecting it. I look forward to hearing what the government plans are in this department very soon. department very soon.
17:31
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
This group includes a number of probing amendments to understand the government's thinking about that inspection and intervention and as over 80% of our secondary schools and over 40% of our primary academies, in England with almost 1,200 multi-academy trust or MATs roughly another thousand single Academy trusts or SATs, latter being largely secondary schools. The amendments in the name of Baroness Spielman and I aim to address and provide tentative answers to 3 main issues.
The first which I think your lordships have already touched on is that there is a sense of unfairness that has developed with a potential misalignment between autonomy and accountability which have underpinned our school reforms over the last two decades. Accountability remains at the school rather than the trust level while autonomy, particularly in more centralised trusts rests with the trust rather than the school. And the amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Blunkett and my amendment aim to address that misalignment.
My amendments for 36, ZZ a -- 436 was not allowed for a more straightforward pass aware there is sustained academic underperformance in their schools. I agree with as ever from my noble Lord Lord Nash that we need to be thinking and looking at and worrying about outcomes for children over process. The amendment excludes schools that have been recently sponsored, so that no disincentive is created for a strong trust to take on a week school. Similarly the amendment adjust form levels of debt privation not in any way to dilute ambition but to make sure that the approach both is there and feels fair, comparing trust to groups of schools in their local area, rather than the national performance table.
And finally the power would aim to avoid creating so-called orphan schools all multi-academy trust that were not economic or an effective size for the purpose of education. And I know from my time in office that there were a handful of trusts where they had schools that were consistently and substantially underperforming their neighbours. The Department was genuinely constrained in its ability to intervene. We had planned to intervene in various small numbers but unfortunately the election got in the way.
It was certainly not the most simple or streamlined way that any of us would have wanted. Traditionally and I think understandably the Department has been hesitant to intervene in a school, or a trust, without independent analysis, typically via an OFSTED report, before doing so. We did find a way to intervene via a failure of governance. But this amendment would make it more coherent. Albeit we believe the power being used rarely. Our proposal is that the department would prepare an annual report which would prepare an annual report which would allow one to understand if there has been any patterns of failure and the scale of any problems in the system.
We believe that in practice the power would not be used often as intervention would send a clear message to other trusts that were underperforming, this needs to be addressed quickly in the needs to be addressed quickly in the interests of children. As my noble friend, Baroness Speelman said amendment 436, ZZ B builds on Lord Blunkett's amendment 435, but brings a very specific focus to MAT inspection. The noble Baroness, Lady Morris questioned the merit of putting details on the bill and the prioritisation that was set out.
I will just say a couple of things about that. I think that it is important that we try and be clear about how MAT inspection school inspection fit together. We do not want that to duplicate or confuse school inspection. And so, what we try to make clear in this amendment is what inspection could look at. It is, if you like a kind of starter that requires a great deal of thought, but it is trying to look at the effectiveness and value for money of MATs, it is not trying to say that one model is better than another model.
And in terms of the prioritisation. The noble Lady talked about too much focus on schools that were significantly underperforming, but she will note that there is a typo in the marshalled List. That is what I spend my time doing in the evenings, obviously spotting typos. So what obviously spotting typos. So what should be three a is inspections must prioritise MATs which is seeking to enter into new partnerships with schools. That is a rather un-clear way of saying MATs that want to grow.
If you want to take on a new school, I think we need to be confident in your ability to manage that well. Then at schools that are significantly underperforming and the schools which are not providing, sorry MATs which are not providing value for money. I'm sure these could be improved on and it feels like we have great cross party working group Minister. If we want volunteers to try and narrow this down. I know that officials have been thinking about this for some time, possibly since Lord and new tried to introduce it, almost 10 years ago.
I think we have got a bit of a starter in terms of the definitions of what we're looking for in the work that we did on strong trust framework which sets out very clearly expectations in relation to all expectations in relation to all aspects of running a good trust. So, I look forward very much to the Ministers reply. I hope she is as strong as I am by the tone of this debate, which feels perhaps slightly different to some that we've had.
I agree with Lord Blunkett's call to action, just doing now. I know we are not allowed props in the chamber but I do have a book beside me. I thought we ought to be here in spirit if not actually present. But what that shows is do it now, but keep doing it, do it well, stick at it, don't let go. I will leave it for the Minister to comment on that.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Will have to say you always know you are going to be in for a good debate when you have a group in which four former secretaries of which four former secretaries of state for a in contributes, in agreement with each other. agreement with each other. Accompanied by a positive bevy of academy and school Ministers. A academy and school Ministers. A former chief inspector as well. Let
The first which I think your lordships have already touched on is that there is a sense of unfairness that has developed with a potential misalignment between autonomy and accountability which have underpinned our school reforms over the last two decades. Accountability remains at the school rather than the trust level while autonomy, particularly in more centralised trusts rests with the trust rather than the school. And the amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Blunkett and my amendment aim to address that misalignment.
My amendments for 36, ZZ a -- 436 was not allowed for a more straightforward pass aware there is sustained academic underperformance in their schools. I agree with as ever from my noble Lord Lord Nash that we need to be thinking and looking at and worrying about outcomes for children over process. The amendment excludes schools that have been recently sponsored, so that no disincentive is created for a strong trust to take on a week school. Similarly the amendment adjust form levels of debt privation not in any way to dilute ambition but to make sure that the approach both is there and feels fair, comparing trust to groups of schools in their local area, rather than the national performance table.
And finally the power would aim to avoid creating so-called orphan schools all multi-academy trust that were not economic or an effective size for the purpose of education. And I know from my time in office that there were a handful of trusts where they had schools that were consistently and substantially underperforming their neighbours. The Department was genuinely constrained in its ability to intervene. We had planned to intervene in various small numbers but unfortunately the election got in the way.
It was certainly not the most simple or streamlined way that any of us would have wanted. Traditionally and I think understandably the Department has been hesitant to intervene in a school, or a trust, without independent analysis, typically via an OFSTED report, before doing so. We did find a way to intervene via a failure of governance. But this amendment would make it more coherent. Albeit we believe the power being used rarely. Our proposal is that the department would prepare an annual report which would prepare an annual report which would allow one to understand if there has been any patterns of failure and the scale of any problems in the system.
We believe that in practice the power would not be used often as intervention would send a clear message to other trusts that were underperforming, this needs to be addressed quickly in the needs to be addressed quickly in the interests of children. As my noble friend, Baroness Speelman said amendment 436, ZZ B builds on Lord Blunkett's amendment 435, but brings a very specific focus to MAT inspection. The noble Baroness, Lady Morris questioned the merit of putting details on the bill and the prioritisation that was set out.
I will just say a couple of things about that. I think that it is important that we try and be clear about how MAT inspection school inspection fit together. We do not want that to duplicate or confuse school inspection. And so, what we try to make clear in this amendment is what inspection could look at. It is, if you like a kind of starter that requires a great deal of thought, but it is trying to look at the effectiveness and value for money of MATs, it is not trying to say that one model is better than another model.
And in terms of the prioritisation. The noble Lady talked about too much focus on schools that were significantly underperforming, but she will note that there is a typo in the marshalled List. That is what I spend my time doing in the evenings, obviously spotting typos. So what obviously spotting typos. So what should be three a is inspections must prioritise MATs which is seeking to enter into new partnerships with schools. That is a rather un-clear way of saying MATs that want to grow.
If you want to take on a new school, I think we need to be confident in your ability to manage that well. Then at schools that are significantly underperforming and the schools which are not providing, sorry MATs which are not providing value for money. I'm sure these could be improved on and it feels like we have great cross party working group Minister. If we want volunteers to try and narrow this down. I know that officials have been thinking about this for some time, possibly since Lord and new tried to introduce it, almost 10 years ago.
I think we have got a bit of a starter in terms of the definitions of what we're looking for in the work that we did on strong trust framework which sets out very clearly expectations in relation to all expectations in relation to all aspects of running a good trust. So, I look forward very much to the Ministers reply. I hope she is as strong as I am by the tone of this debate, which feels perhaps slightly different to some that we've had.
I agree with Lord Blunkett's call to action, just doing now. I know we are not allowed props in the chamber but I do have a book beside me. I thought we ought to be here in spirit if not actually present. But what that shows is do it now, but keep doing it, do it well, stick at it, don't let go. I will leave it for the Minister to comment on that.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Will have to say you always know you are going to be in for a good debate when you have a group in which four former secretaries of which four former secretaries of state for a in contributes, in agreement with each other. agreement with each other. Accompanied by a positive bevy of academy and school Ministers. A academy and school Ministers. A former chief inspector as well. Let
17:40
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
former chief inspector as well. Let me just start by, sorry can I just start by saying I thought that my noble friends Lord Blunkett's context setting in terms of the history of how we got to this point was both enormously interesting and also formative. In identifying how I think we have arrived at this cross-party consensus about the need to ring multi-academy trusts into the inspection system. And that is why, of course, the government set out in our manifesto that that was our intention, leaving as others have argued that this will make the system fairer, more transparent and enable direct intervention to address a failure, where necessary.
Turning to amendment 4 35 tabled by Lord Blunkett and 436, ZZB, table by Baroness Speelman to introduce OFSTED inspection multi-academy trusts and amendments 436, said that a tabled by Baroness Baron which seeks to bring in a related regime of intervention -- ZZ D. Can I start by saying I'm grateful to the noble Lords for bringing these amendments. This is both an important matter and as we've seen in this debate, this evening one in which there is a large amount of consensus.
I'm pleased to say that there is support of both sides of the House bringing multi-academy trusts into scope for inspections and as I say we are committed to bringing forward the legislation during this parliament, to introduce inspection multi- academy trusts and intervention where there is failure. The inspection regime should also highlight excellence and support the spreading of good practice between trust. And taken together those will help to raise standards in education and support all children to achieve and thrive.
I suppose my regret today is I'm playing the role of the force of conservatism, in the face of, in the face of the sort of urgent by noble Lords across at the House to just get on with it. But perhaps I could just come noble laws through the process. The government does believe that it is important that we bring multi-academy trusts into the inspection system, but also that we do it well. We want to work that we do it well.
We want to work with the details right, in the interests of the workforce. There are a number of complex issues that were working through. Some of which have been raised in the debate and particularly raised by the noble Lady, Baroness Barran, to ensure that we bring forward a system that delivers for pupils and the workforce. For example, inspection of multi-academy trust must be delivered in a way, several noble Lords have talked about how it works in harmony with the school instruction which is also in the process of currently being reformed.
And does it, in a way that avoids excessive burden on the school workforce and of course, helpfully it was identified, does it in a way that is effective but proportionate. As I've said, we are already engaging with the sector. I hope we will encourage noble Lords but we were also pleased to OFSTED secured funds, from 2026, in the spending review to build on this with further research and piloting. And Austin's work will continue in parallel with the government bringing forward legislation so that we meet at manifesto commitment.
As I say to bring multi-academy trusts into the inspection system, during this Parliament. I reckon guys that this won't be quick enough for noble Lords, around the chamber. I hope that the noble Lords recognise that when they had the responsibility of actually delivering policy, frustrated, though I'm sure they were on various occasions, they also understood the importance of getting it right. There is no difference of objective between the government and those urging speed here. There is just a responsibility to ensure that this is done properly and I hope that noble Lords will recognise that.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Just before the noble Lady sits
Turning to amendment 4 35 tabled by Lord Blunkett and 436, ZZB, table by Baroness Speelman to introduce OFSTED inspection multi-academy trusts and amendments 436, said that a tabled by Baroness Baron which seeks to bring in a related regime of intervention -- ZZ D. Can I start by saying I'm grateful to the noble Lords for bringing these amendments. This is both an important matter and as we've seen in this debate, this evening one in which there is a large amount of consensus.
I'm pleased to say that there is support of both sides of the House bringing multi-academy trusts into scope for inspections and as I say we are committed to bringing forward the legislation during this parliament, to introduce inspection multi- academy trusts and intervention where there is failure. The inspection regime should also highlight excellence and support the spreading of good practice between trust. And taken together those will help to raise standards in education and support all children to achieve and thrive.
I suppose my regret today is I'm playing the role of the force of conservatism, in the face of, in the face of the sort of urgent by noble Lords across at the House to just get on with it. But perhaps I could just come noble laws through the process. The government does believe that it is important that we bring multi-academy trusts into the inspection system, but also that we do it well. We want to work that we do it well.
We want to work with the details right, in the interests of the workforce. There are a number of complex issues that were working through. Some of which have been raised in the debate and particularly raised by the noble Lady, Baroness Barran, to ensure that we bring forward a system that delivers for pupils and the workforce. For example, inspection of multi-academy trust must be delivered in a way, several noble Lords have talked about how it works in harmony with the school instruction which is also in the process of currently being reformed.
And does it, in a way that avoids excessive burden on the school workforce and of course, helpfully it was identified, does it in a way that is effective but proportionate. As I've said, we are already engaging with the sector. I hope we will encourage noble Lords but we were also pleased to OFSTED secured funds, from 2026, in the spending review to build on this with further research and piloting. And Austin's work will continue in parallel with the government bringing forward legislation so that we meet at manifesto commitment.
As I say to bring multi-academy trusts into the inspection system, during this Parliament. I reckon guys that this won't be quick enough for noble Lords, around the chamber. I hope that the noble Lords recognise that when they had the responsibility of actually delivering policy, frustrated, though I'm sure they were on various occasions, they also understood the importance of getting it right. There is no difference of objective between the government and those urging speed here. There is just a responsibility to ensure that this is done properly and I hope that noble Lords will recognise that.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Just before the noble Lady sits
17:45
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Just before the noble Lady sits down, the Lord Stern tart. I hope it is the Department of done a lot of thinking on this, 18 months ago. We thinking on this, 18 months ago. We are not starting from a standing start and if that noble Lord hasn't seen that thinking. I'm sure it is
**** Possible New Speaker ****
sitting and can be rekindled. I'm sure that that will be part of what officials have been using. I would just reiterate the point that I made that there have been other considerable changes to the offstage regime, many of which announced this week. We need to ensure that the week. We need to ensure that the work goes alongside that. We will, work goes alongside that. We will, very soon have a new white paper, on schools and that would of course be leading to legislation, which I'm absolutely certain will help us to absolutely certain will help us to make progress on this important development in which there is clear development in which there is clear
**** Possible New Speaker ****
development in which there is clear I'm grateful to the final intervention by the honourable lady opposite. Collective memory is a opposite. Collective memory is a ways been a problem in government and it's nice to know that there is something on a shelf somewhere, something on a shelf somewhere, although I do have to say that we have had rather an experience over
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Just before the noble Lady sits down, the Lord Stern tart. I hope it is the Department of done a lot of thinking on this, 18 months ago. We thinking on this, 18 months ago. We are not starting from a standing start and if that noble Lord hasn't seen that thinking. I'm sure it is
**** Possible New Speaker ****
sitting and can be rekindled. I'm sure that that will be part of what officials have been using. I would just reiterate the point that I made that there have been other considerable changes to the offstage regime, many of which announced this week. We need to ensure that the week. We need to ensure that the work goes alongside that. We will, work goes alongside that. We will, very soon have a new white paper, on schools and that would of course be leading to legislation, which I'm absolutely certain will help us to absolutely certain will help us to make progress on this important development in which there is clear development in which there is clear
**** Possible New Speaker ****
development in which there is clear I'm grateful to the final intervention by the honourable lady opposite. Collective memory is a opposite. Collective memory is a ways been a problem in government and it's nice to know that there is something on a shelf somewhere, something on a shelf somewhere, although I do have to say that we have had rather an experience over
17:46
Lord Blunkett (Labour)
-
-
Lord Blunkett (Labour)
the last 14 months sometimes pulling the wrong one off the shelf. This could I thank my noble friend the Minister for her reply. I just put it this way, it's perfectly feasible to square the circle, it's perfectly feasible to put on the face of the bill and enabling clause that then allows that the Department through the white paper and beyond to bring forward implementation and as has been suggested by a number of noble peers in this House, you can then suggest it with either guidance or if it requires it, regulation.
I do think we've got in a mindset of having to put things in the order that they were first thought of and difficult as it is and it is difficult to get legislative approval within government, we used to sometimes manage to do it not least when Baroness Blackstone and Lord Rooker were representatives of mine in this House because they used to cause absolute sodding outrage and normally they were right. I will just finish on this, one time I had the exchequer -- Chancellor of the exchequer and the fine he demanded the resignation of Jeff Rugova Sonny said the House and I said there's 1 Surefire Way of making sure everybody knows about it Gordon,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that is to fire him. On that note I withdraw the amendment. I also add my thanks to the noble
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I also add my thanks to the noble Lord for thanking the Minister for giving such a speedy response, it's
I do think we've got in a mindset of having to put things in the order that they were first thought of and difficult as it is and it is difficult to get legislative approval within government, we used to sometimes manage to do it not least when Baroness Blackstone and Lord Rooker were representatives of mine in this House because they used to cause absolute sodding outrage and normally they were right. I will just finish on this, one time I had the exchequer -- Chancellor of the exchequer and the fine he demanded the resignation of Jeff Rugova Sonny said the House and I said there's 1 Surefire Way of making sure everybody knows about it Gordon,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that is to fire him. On that note I withdraw the amendment. I also add my thanks to the noble
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I also add my thanks to the noble Lord for thanking the Minister for giving such a speedy response, it's
17:48
Lord Baker of Dorking (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Baker of Dorking (Conservative)
giving such a speedy response, it's almost unknown, it gives me the opportunity to congratulate her on being reappointed as the Minister, but not only that she's got it into departments. The W DP and in education, you are the most powerful Minister for skills it's ever been appointed. I think you will make the most of it and I think this change in the shuffle is one of the most
**** Possible New Speaker ****
significant of the shuffle. Is at your Lordships pleasure the amendment be withdrawn? The amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 436 Baroness Pulman not Amendment 436 Baroness Pulman not moved. 436 ZZ a Baroness Barran not moved. 436 ZZ a Baroness Barran not moved. 436 ZZ be Baroness Spielman moved. 436 ZZ be Baroness Spielman not moved. Amendment 436 ZA Lord Knight of Weymouth.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Knight of Weymouth. I rise to move men for 36 ZA and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
significant of the shuffle. Is at your Lordships pleasure the amendment be withdrawn? The amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 436 Baroness Pulman not Amendment 436 Baroness Pulman not moved. 436 ZZ a Baroness Barran not moved. 436 ZZ a Baroness Barran not moved. 436 ZZ be Baroness Spielman moved. 436 ZZ be Baroness Spielman not moved. Amendment 436 ZA Lord Knight of Weymouth.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Knight of Weymouth. I rise to move men for 36 ZA and
17:49
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
-
-
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
436ZB in my name, I would remind Lordships of my educational interests in particular in this case as the chair of the Council of British international schools. I want to thank Emily Constantius the chair of the British international schools safeguarding coalition who is also the CEO of the safeguarding alliance for her assistance in these amendments. She has given me ample evidence of two safeguarding Leupolz that we are seeking to close with these amendments. First is the problem that under current legislation the teacher regulation, regular three agency can only act when misconduct occurs in England.
This means that it is not possible for a teacher qualified in England he then commits an offence overseas to have that included on the register. Indeed our experience is that there is not even any means to report the offence to TRA that the individual is a risk to children. International schools routinely use prohibition checks upon recruitment of teachers. So this loophole is really significant for them, that if an individual has committed an offence in one school in one country and then goes to another, that offence does not get picked up by the prohibition check.
Therefore as it stands, prohibited individuals can exploit international mobility to avoid scrutiny, teachers dismissed abroad for misconduct can return to England or elsewhere uncheck. And with pupils placed at risk in this way the integrity of the profession is undermined. My amendment simply applies the teacher misconduct regime to anyone who is at any time been qualified to teach in England and thus closes the loophole I believe. The second problem is the growing practice of prohibited individuals legally changing their names between organisations and across countries to evade scrutiny and justice.
The scenario I am concerned about is where an individual has been convicted for an offence and then changes their name. They may then train and qualify as a teacher under the new identity and with a teacher reference number attached to that name. My amendment seeks to insert reasonable efforts to investigate name changes when the Secretary of State investigates disciplinary cases, I hope my noble friend the Minister, and I would want to associate myself wholly with the comments just been made by Lord Baker in respect of her reappointment, but I hope my noble friend agrees that these Leupolz must be closed and will agree to amend -- amend the bill accordingly.
I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment paper, clause 45, page 180 -- 108 line 18 at the end insert
**** Possible New Speaker ****
qualify. I would like to add my support to
This means that it is not possible for a teacher qualified in England he then commits an offence overseas to have that included on the register. Indeed our experience is that there is not even any means to report the offence to TRA that the individual is a risk to children. International schools routinely use prohibition checks upon recruitment of teachers. So this loophole is really significant for them, that if an individual has committed an offence in one school in one country and then goes to another, that offence does not get picked up by the prohibition check.
Therefore as it stands, prohibited individuals can exploit international mobility to avoid scrutiny, teachers dismissed abroad for misconduct can return to England or elsewhere uncheck. And with pupils placed at risk in this way the integrity of the profession is undermined. My amendment simply applies the teacher misconduct regime to anyone who is at any time been qualified to teach in England and thus closes the loophole I believe. The second problem is the growing practice of prohibited individuals legally changing their names between organisations and across countries to evade scrutiny and justice.
The scenario I am concerned about is where an individual has been convicted for an offence and then changes their name. They may then train and qualify as a teacher under the new identity and with a teacher reference number attached to that name. My amendment seeks to insert reasonable efforts to investigate name changes when the Secretary of State investigates disciplinary cases, I hope my noble friend the Minister, and I would want to associate myself wholly with the comments just been made by Lord Baker in respect of her reappointment, but I hope my noble friend agrees that these Leupolz must be closed and will agree to amend -- amend the bill accordingly.
I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment paper, clause 45, page 180 -- 108 line 18 at the end insert
**** Possible New Speaker ****
qualify. I would like to add my support to
17:52
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Conservative)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to add my support to the amendments 436 ZA and 436ZB in this group under the name of Lord Knight and in doing so declare my interest as honorary president of interest as honorary president of Clovis who as the noble Lord said arm members of the British international schools safeguarding coalition. As the Lord set out these amendments close an important safeguarding loophole by extending the jurisdiction of the teaching regulation agency to accept referrals of misconduct committed by UK qualified teachers working overseas and strengthening prohibition checks to ensure individuals cannot exploit name changes to evade detection.
Prohibition checks are essential to identify individuals banned from teaching due to misconduct, safeguarding concerns or professional incompetence, yet none of these misdemeanours committed in international schools overseas can be referred the TRA. Indeed as the noble Lord stressed, the current system doesn't even provide an option for them to report such concerns to the TRA through its online system creating a clear gap on the information that they hold. The Leupolz in the current system mean that the teacher whose return to the UK for instance and should have been referred to the TRA due to potentially serious child welfare issues being committed overseas cannot be and so no prohibition order can be made.
As a result the individual would pass the statutory check which route schools rely on is evident that an individual is safe to work with children. In practice that could mean a teacher dismissed for misconduct abroad would have a clear result on the prohibition check and could subsequently be hired by a school in England they had no idea of their previous behaviour and allow the teachers to resume teaching. I'm sure the Minister will agree that this situation clearly is unsatisfactory and should be addressed and I hope she is able to accept these sensible full amendment supported by the safeguarding alliance in six UK governments recognise British school associations and will undoubtedly strengthen the U.K.'s reputation as
**** Possible New Speaker ****
a global leader in safeguarding. These seem incredibly sensible amendments and I would hope the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Minister will be able to accept them. This I will speak only briefly to this
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I will speak only briefly to this group amendment table by the noble Lord Lord Knight of Weymouth. Misconduct regime covered in these Misconduct regime covered in these clauses is clearly very important for the protection of schoolchildren and maintaining the highest and maintaining the highest standards both in the classroom and
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Conservative)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to add my support to the amendments 436 ZA and 436ZB in this group under the name of Lord Knight and in doing so declare my interest as honorary president of interest as honorary president of Clovis who as the noble Lord said arm members of the British international schools safeguarding coalition. As the Lord set out these amendments close an important safeguarding loophole by extending the jurisdiction of the teaching regulation agency to accept referrals of misconduct committed by UK qualified teachers working overseas and strengthening prohibition checks to ensure individuals cannot exploit name changes to evade detection.
Prohibition checks are essential to identify individuals banned from teaching due to misconduct, safeguarding concerns or professional incompetence, yet none of these misdemeanours committed in international schools overseas can be referred the TRA. Indeed as the noble Lord stressed, the current system doesn't even provide an option for them to report such concerns to the TRA through its online system creating a clear gap on the information that they hold. The Leupolz in the current system mean that the teacher whose return to the UK for instance and should have been referred to the TRA due to potentially serious child welfare issues being committed overseas cannot be and so no prohibition order can be made.
As a result the individual would pass the statutory check which route schools rely on is evident that an individual is safe to work with children. In practice that could mean a teacher dismissed for misconduct abroad would have a clear result on the prohibition check and could subsequently be hired by a school in England they had no idea of their previous behaviour and allow the teachers to resume teaching. I'm sure the Minister will agree that this situation clearly is unsatisfactory and should be addressed and I hope she is able to accept these sensible full amendment supported by the safeguarding alliance in six UK governments recognise British school associations and will undoubtedly strengthen the U.K.'s reputation as
**** Possible New Speaker ****
a global leader in safeguarding. These seem incredibly sensible amendments and I would hope the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Minister will be able to accept them. This I will speak only briefly to this
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I will speak only briefly to this group amendment table by the noble Lord Lord Knight of Weymouth. Misconduct regime covered in these Misconduct regime covered in these clauses is clearly very important for the protection of schoolchildren and maintaining the highest and maintaining the highest standards both in the classroom and
17:55
The Earl of Effingham (Conservative)
-
-
The Earl of Effingham (Conservative)
standards both in the classroom and outside in public perception. His Majesty's loyal opposition welcomes what is new in these clauses because it is right and proportionate that employers and authorities should have the ability to take action regardless of when or where an instance of lace and whether the individual was teacher in the profession at that time. We also welcome online education, independent educational settings being brought into scope in addition to the possibility of investigating a suspicion or an incident regardless of how it came to light.
Ensuring that this regime applies fully and is not open to exploitation by those who seek to identify and use Leupolz is critically important. The amendments put forward by Lord Knight I like this. We do hope that the government will take this opportunity to assure your Lordships house that there will be in this section of the bill we would ask the Minister how will she ensure that these eminently sensible ensure that these eminently sensible
**** Possible New Speaker ****
amendments are addressed rigorously? Speaking to the amendments in
Ensuring that this regime applies fully and is not open to exploitation by those who seek to identify and use Leupolz is critically important. The amendments put forward by Lord Knight I like this. We do hope that the government will take this opportunity to assure your Lordships house that there will be in this section of the bill we would ask the Minister how will she ensure that these eminently sensible ensure that these eminently sensible
**** Possible New Speaker ****
amendments are addressed rigorously? Speaking to the amendments in
17:56
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Speaking to the amendments in group 6 tabled by Lord Knight can I group 6 tabled by Lord Knight can I just say first of all that I have considerable sympathy with the concerns expressed through these amendments and I hope I can provide some assurance about how the system operates in order to minimise the risks that noble Lords have identified here. Turning first to amendment 436 said a, clause 45 captures individuals who are or have at any time been employed or engaged to carry out any teaching work at specific institutions in England.
This clause ensures that those who commit serious misconduct are investigated where appropriate and prevented from carrying out teaching work. I understand the intention of this amendment to expand that to cover those who have worked overseas, although on a technical basis I understand that the amendment is written -- as written wouldn't have that effect. Furthermore the existing regular three regime applies to teachers in England, it is operated by the TRA on behalf of the Secretary of State and the Department's view is that it would be wrong for the Secretary of State to regulate the teaching profession overseas.
Keeping children safe in education statutory guidance already clearly sets out the legal requirements placed on schools and colleges to carry out pre-appointment checks when employing staff from overseas. That would include the responsibility on schools I think goes further than the noble Lady suggested in her remarks, this would include obtaining an enhanced certificate, even if the individual has never been to the UK, in addition schools and colleges must make any further checks they think appropriate so that any relevant events occurred outside the UK can be considered.
Amongst others these checks would include where available criminal record checks for overseas applicants and the Home Office publishes guidance on that and obtaining a letter from the professional regulating authority in which the applicant has been working has worked, confirming that they have not been posed any sanctions or restrictions and or that they are aware of any reason why they may be unsuitable to teach. On amendment 436 On amendment 436ZB this amendment introduces a new requirement for the Secretary of State to take reasonable efforts to include any changes of names on the prohibition list for the reasons that my noble friend outlined.
There is already provision in legislation for the prohibition list to contain other such information in relation to the persons whose names are included on the lists. Schools are already legally required to carry out a range of pre-appointment checks which can help to identify a name change, because of course if a person changes their name any legal documents will need to be updated such as passports and driving licence. Keeping children safe in education makes clear that schools must verify a candidate's identity to be sure that the person is who they claim to be and that includes being aware of the potential for individuals changing their name, best practices checking the name on the birth certificate where that is available.
I understand as I have said at the beginning the concerns of noble Lords, I hope I have provided some reassurance about the process -- processes that are in place and I look forward to, I would urge the noble Lord to withdraw his amendments but can I just say I would be willing to continue the conversations to provide some assurance around the issues the noble Lord has raised through these noble Lord has raised through these
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Speaking to the amendments in group 6 tabled by Lord Knight can I group 6 tabled by Lord Knight can I just say first of all that I have considerable sympathy with the concerns expressed through these amendments and I hope I can provide some assurance about how the system operates in order to minimise the risks that noble Lords have identified here. Turning first to amendment 436 said a, clause 45 captures individuals who are or have at any time been employed or engaged to carry out any teaching work at specific institutions in England.
This clause ensures that those who commit serious misconduct are investigated where appropriate and prevented from carrying out teaching work. I understand the intention of this amendment to expand that to cover those who have worked overseas, although on a technical basis I understand that the amendment is written -- as written wouldn't have that effect. Furthermore the existing regular three regime applies to teachers in England, it is operated by the TRA on behalf of the Secretary of State and the Department's view is that it would be wrong for the Secretary of State to regulate the teaching profession overseas.
Keeping children safe in education statutory guidance already clearly sets out the legal requirements placed on schools and colleges to carry out pre-appointment checks when employing staff from overseas. That would include the responsibility on schools I think goes further than the noble Lady suggested in her remarks, this would include obtaining an enhanced certificate, even if the individual has never been to the UK, in addition schools and colleges must make any further checks they think appropriate so that any relevant events occurred outside the UK can be considered.
Amongst others these checks would include where available criminal record checks for overseas applicants and the Home Office publishes guidance on that and obtaining a letter from the professional regulating authority in which the applicant has been working has worked, confirming that they have not been posed any sanctions or restrictions and or that they are aware of any reason why they may be unsuitable to teach. On amendment 436 On amendment 436ZB this amendment introduces a new requirement for the Secretary of State to take reasonable efforts to include any changes of names on the prohibition list for the reasons that my noble friend outlined.
There is already provision in legislation for the prohibition list to contain other such information in relation to the persons whose names are included on the lists. Schools are already legally required to carry out a range of pre-appointment checks which can help to identify a name change, because of course if a person changes their name any legal documents will need to be updated such as passports and driving licence. Keeping children safe in education makes clear that schools must verify a candidate's identity to be sure that the person is who they claim to be and that includes being aware of the potential for individuals changing their name, best practices checking the name on the birth certificate where that is available.
I understand as I have said at the beginning the concerns of noble Lords, I hope I have provided some reassurance about the process -- processes that are in place and I look forward to, I would urge the noble Lord to withdraw his amendments but can I just say I would be willing to continue the conversations to provide some assurance around the issues the noble Lord has raised through these noble Lord has raised through these
18:01
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
-
-
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
Am grateful to my noble friend, particularly for the sentiment in her windup, the small but perfectly formed group of amendments. She spoke to the reality. The teacher regulatory agency doesn't want to regulate teacher services. That is true. The system, here in England regards them as the people that regulate those that are qualified to teach, in this country. It does still appear to me to be teachers returning to this country to teach. We should be encouraging people who have been attracted by teaching overseas to come home and teach that in the English maintain set because we are short of teachers.
And part of that must include the safeguarding arrangements, to do that. I understand about enhanced certificates and criminal record checks and so on but it is notoriously difficult when teachers have a career across multiple jurisdictions to ensure that you have got absolute certainty that the records are complete in respect of that. I will willingly take up her offer, with her or wherever the ministries were safeguarding, in the department. If I could bring along Emily from the safeguarding alliance who has the expertise, so that they can discuss it, I would be very grateful.
On that basis I wish to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
withdraw the amendment. Amendment is by leave withdrawn.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 436, ZZ B. Not moved. The question is that clause 45 stand part of the bill. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. We now come to the group of the members are beginning group of the members are beginning with 430 6A, for Baroness Woolf of
**** Possible New Speaker ****
knowledge. I declare an interest as the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I declare an interest as the governor for King's College London. governor for King's College London. Clause 46 of this bill is intended to have important consequences for
And part of that must include the safeguarding arrangements, to do that. I understand about enhanced certificates and criminal record checks and so on but it is notoriously difficult when teachers have a career across multiple jurisdictions to ensure that you have got absolute certainty that the records are complete in respect of that. I will willingly take up her offer, with her or wherever the ministries were safeguarding, in the department. If I could bring along Emily from the safeguarding alliance who has the expertise, so that they can discuss it, I would be very grateful.
On that basis I wish to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
withdraw the amendment. Amendment is by leave withdrawn.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 436, ZZ B. Not moved. The question is that clause 45 stand part of the bill. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. We now come to the group of the members are beginning group of the members are beginning with 430 6A, for Baroness Woolf of
**** Possible New Speaker ****
knowledge. I declare an interest as the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I declare an interest as the governor for King's College London. governor for King's College London. Clause 46 of this bill is intended to have important consequences for
18:03
Baroness Wolf of Dulwich (Crossbench)
-
-
Baroness Wolf of Dulwich (Crossbench)
to have important consequences for the staff of schools. And as it stands it certainly will. I'm not sure that they will be the ones that the government expected and intended. My concern here is with the impact of the bill on the teaching of vocational and technical subjects in schools and in sixth form colleges which are academies. I believe the current government recognises vocational technical subjects which include computer science and engineering as central to its cause agenda and am absolutely sure that the noble Minister does.
This bill threatens to underline them. It will make it far more difficult and far rarer for schools and for many sixth form colleges to provide high quality teaching by subject specialists. Clause of 46 6 to ensure that teaching in all schools is carried out by qualified staff, staff with teaching qualifications. If you ask the general public whether they think it is a good idea for teachers to be qualified, they will obviously be inclined to say yes. However, if you ask whether they were did for subjects to be taught by subject specialists they will also see us.
If you tell them that quite often this is not the case, especially in maths and science that they are rightly pretty horrified. In fact I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that producing is a great substitute for a trained chef teaching catering or a IT expert delivering computer science. In an ideal world this would not be in either all but this is the world we live in. It is currently quite often possible to find highly qualified professionals who are willing and interested in part-time teaching and indeed happy to undertake some practical class training.
These people are almost not interested in becoming a full- time school-based teachers, or therefore an undertaking an extensive teacher training program, to gain a certification that does not make sense of them, in terms of time and cost and their future careers. The more in demand expertise is, in the labour market, the harder the priority on the skills agenda. The more this is the case. For example finding the people to teach computer science is a nightmare. With huge gaps in availability across the country.
And I really think we must ask whether it can make it more so. Back in 2011, at that time the school system was in vested with a large number of low level supposedly vocational qualifications which were very easy to pass and counted as a GCSE equivalent. These have now gone but the relevant point here how they were taught. Not only is there bizarre paper-based. People with no expertise or experience whatsoever in the area supposedly covered. Schools just drafted in whichever teacher had some spare time in their timetable always volunteered for the job by the head of Department.
So you really might find the games teacher in front of a tourism class or an English teacher delivering Health and Social Care. In fact very often you did. And when I asked why they couldn't at least bring in a vocational expert, the schools will explain to me that they couldn't because they had to be a qualified teacher in the classroom so double the cost. That wasn't 100% true, for them. But schools would not take the risk. Many of my fellow laws have argued strongly in the recent past for the 16 school covering less academically focused.
And government policy for 16 to 19-year-olds include the stark focus on T-Levels. I'm very aware of the controversy surrounding existing qualifications, including with everything I've heard, a single person in this House, or indeed anywhere arguing that there should be any post-16 courses that are technical in vocational focus. What is the point of spending huge amounts developing qualifications with employer input and the making it hugely unlikely that a large numbers of our schools anyone with direct experience and occupations involved would be able to teach students.
FE colleges are and for the future will remain the most important providers of vocational and technical courses. And this clause does not apply to them. They are not and should not be the only providers in this area. Not least because colleges have been penalised compared to schools. I find it hard to pay competitive find it hard to pay competitive salaries. Six form colleges are also academies. These institutions are often excellent, the main destination for more 16 to 19-year- olds in the area and offer a wide range of vocational and technical options.
When this bill was first published, I tabled a couple of questions, try to clarify this acquisition of 16 to 19 academies, such as six form colleges. I can't say I was terribly reassured by the answers which seem to have been drafted in order to avoid giving any keen reply. The Minister of the Department of education informed me that QDS had never been a requirement for further education, which I hadn't asked about. This is that clause 46 will apply to primary and secondary state funded schools but am afraid the explanation of what was a school included various terms of institution and did not actually refer to 16 to 19 at all.
And they also critically said that there would be some limited exemptions set out in regulation to provide, "Flex ability to provide individuals the Specialist schools and experience to support the needs and experience to support the needs of their pupils. " That last bit sounds very encouraging and very nice but as far as I know we have not been given any clear indication of what these exemptions are actually going to be. My experience that's what I wanted to give you some history for the education review is that schools very reasonably and very sensibly play safe.
They are pretty paranoid, they do not have the time to engage with the detailed and regulations and they are really not going to take the risk that their interpretation of regulations is it different to the one the DfE civil servants, or Ofsted inspectors will adopt. At second reading, there was some idea that UTC's might be treated differently recognising the specialised nature. There is a limited number of these and each one is focused on specialise. I'm really worried that the current provision in the bill will drive technical vacation expertise out of a large section of our education system.
And I really cannot find any evidence to suggest that this price is worth paying for the supposedly defect of teachers, in these classrooms. I do fully recognise the change in QDS requirements is something to which the government is fully committed. My amendment is therefore something of a probing amendment. What it does is to focus the requirements on a National Curriculum subjects, so that includes any National Curriculum subjects being taught post-16, not just the classrooms pre-16.
A National Curriculum subjects are subjects which will indeed normally be taught by full- time staff who are making teaching their career. What my amendment will do is free up the vocational and technical curriculum and support in a way that is very simple and easy for institutions to understand and act on. I'm confident that the government does recognise the need for some flexibilities, so that the schools can hire individuals with specialist skills and it must surely be preferable to organise flexibilities in a way that does not have DfE spending months and months drawing up complex, regulations.
I hope might be able to did and I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed, clause 56 page 100, insert the words as listed on the marshalled List.
This bill threatens to underline them. It will make it far more difficult and far rarer for schools and for many sixth form colleges to provide high quality teaching by subject specialists. Clause of 46 6 to ensure that teaching in all schools is carried out by qualified staff, staff with teaching qualifications. If you ask the general public whether they think it is a good idea for teachers to be qualified, they will obviously be inclined to say yes. However, if you ask whether they were did for subjects to be taught by subject specialists they will also see us.
If you tell them that quite often this is not the case, especially in maths and science that they are rightly pretty horrified. In fact I have yet to meet anyone who thinks that producing is a great substitute for a trained chef teaching catering or a IT expert delivering computer science. In an ideal world this would not be in either all but this is the world we live in. It is currently quite often possible to find highly qualified professionals who are willing and interested in part-time teaching and indeed happy to undertake some practical class training.
These people are almost not interested in becoming a full- time school-based teachers, or therefore an undertaking an extensive teacher training program, to gain a certification that does not make sense of them, in terms of time and cost and their future careers. The more in demand expertise is, in the labour market, the harder the priority on the skills agenda. The more this is the case. For example finding the people to teach computer science is a nightmare. With huge gaps in availability across the country.
And I really think we must ask whether it can make it more so. Back in 2011, at that time the school system was in vested with a large number of low level supposedly vocational qualifications which were very easy to pass and counted as a GCSE equivalent. These have now gone but the relevant point here how they were taught. Not only is there bizarre paper-based. People with no expertise or experience whatsoever in the area supposedly covered. Schools just drafted in whichever teacher had some spare time in their timetable always volunteered for the job by the head of Department.
So you really might find the games teacher in front of a tourism class or an English teacher delivering Health and Social Care. In fact very often you did. And when I asked why they couldn't at least bring in a vocational expert, the schools will explain to me that they couldn't because they had to be a qualified teacher in the classroom so double the cost. That wasn't 100% true, for them. But schools would not take the risk. Many of my fellow laws have argued strongly in the recent past for the 16 school covering less academically focused.
And government policy for 16 to 19-year-olds include the stark focus on T-Levels. I'm very aware of the controversy surrounding existing qualifications, including with everything I've heard, a single person in this House, or indeed anywhere arguing that there should be any post-16 courses that are technical in vocational focus. What is the point of spending huge amounts developing qualifications with employer input and the making it hugely unlikely that a large numbers of our schools anyone with direct experience and occupations involved would be able to teach students.
FE colleges are and for the future will remain the most important providers of vocational and technical courses. And this clause does not apply to them. They are not and should not be the only providers in this area. Not least because colleges have been penalised compared to schools. I find it hard to pay competitive find it hard to pay competitive salaries. Six form colleges are also academies. These institutions are often excellent, the main destination for more 16 to 19-year- olds in the area and offer a wide range of vocational and technical options.
When this bill was first published, I tabled a couple of questions, try to clarify this acquisition of 16 to 19 academies, such as six form colleges. I can't say I was terribly reassured by the answers which seem to have been drafted in order to avoid giving any keen reply. The Minister of the Department of education informed me that QDS had never been a requirement for further education, which I hadn't asked about. This is that clause 46 will apply to primary and secondary state funded schools but am afraid the explanation of what was a school included various terms of institution and did not actually refer to 16 to 19 at all.
And they also critically said that there would be some limited exemptions set out in regulation to provide, "Flex ability to provide individuals the Specialist schools and experience to support the needs and experience to support the needs of their pupils. " That last bit sounds very encouraging and very nice but as far as I know we have not been given any clear indication of what these exemptions are actually going to be. My experience that's what I wanted to give you some history for the education review is that schools very reasonably and very sensibly play safe.
They are pretty paranoid, they do not have the time to engage with the detailed and regulations and they are really not going to take the risk that their interpretation of regulations is it different to the one the DfE civil servants, or Ofsted inspectors will adopt. At second reading, there was some idea that UTC's might be treated differently recognising the specialised nature. There is a limited number of these and each one is focused on specialise. I'm really worried that the current provision in the bill will drive technical vacation expertise out of a large section of our education system.
And I really cannot find any evidence to suggest that this price is worth paying for the supposedly defect of teachers, in these classrooms. I do fully recognise the change in QDS requirements is something to which the government is fully committed. My amendment is therefore something of a probing amendment. What it does is to focus the requirements on a National Curriculum subjects, so that includes any National Curriculum subjects being taught post-16, not just the classrooms pre-16.
A National Curriculum subjects are subjects which will indeed normally be taught by full- time staff who are making teaching their career. What my amendment will do is free up the vocational and technical curriculum and support in a way that is very simple and easy for institutions to understand and act on. I'm confident that the government does recognise the need for some flexibilities, so that the schools can hire individuals with specialist skills and it must surely be preferable to organise flexibilities in a way that does not have DfE spending months and months drawing up complex, regulations.
I hope might be able to did and I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed, clause 56 page 100, insert the words as listed on the marshalled List.
18:12
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
on the marshalled List. I'm not going to intervene in this debate, because I find it quite this debate, because I find it quite difficult. I've got something with the amendment that has just been moved. Most basically my position is that I think teachers should have qualified teacher status. I've not got involved in the fringes of the debate because I think it is genuinely difficult to draw dividing lines and have to come down on one side of the other and condone the other side for people qualified teacher status.
I strongly disapprove the actions of the previous government and taking away that requirement from teachers and academies in all teachers. I've always had sympathy with a range of subjects were in my heart I know that many people without the PTS status or whatever, without practical experience could motivate children and deliver the curriculum. Possibly to a high standard and more effectively than other teachers. I know from experience as a teacher, very often what happens is the teacher is not teaching the subject's got the qualified teacher status and some teaching.
I just did want to say that I have sympathy with that, very much hope that on the understanding that I think the government has expressed and promised to bring forward further information. I'm not saying, I do not want to go down that route. Just acknowledgement that we do not want to waste the time of people have got something to offer to our children, if some flexibility can be brought back around this arrangement of subjects, is something I very much welcome.
Baroness Morris of Yardley (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
on the marshalled List. I'm not going to intervene in this debate, because I find it quite this debate, because I find it quite difficult. I've got something with the amendment that has just been moved. Most basically my position is that I think teachers should have qualified teacher status. I've not got involved in the fringes of the debate because I think it is genuinely difficult to draw dividing lines and have to come down on one side of the other and condone the other side for people qualified teacher status.
I strongly disapprove the actions of the previous government and taking away that requirement from teachers and academies in all teachers. I've always had sympathy with a range of subjects were in my heart I know that many people without the PTS status or whatever, without practical experience could motivate children and deliver the curriculum. Possibly to a high standard and more effectively than other teachers. I know from experience as a teacher, very often what happens is the teacher is not teaching the subject's got the qualified teacher status and some teaching.
I just did want to say that I have sympathy with that, very much hope that on the understanding that I think the government has expressed and promised to bring forward further information. I'm not saying, I do not want to go down that route. Just acknowledgement that we do not want to waste the time of people have got something to offer to our children, if some flexibility can be brought back around this arrangement of subjects, is something I very much welcome.
18:13
Baroness Bousted (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Bousted (Labour)
I would like to think to this group of amendments. Speak to this group of amendments. In particular, 436, B, 400 and... Just information. Before I became a union leader and worked with the devil, according to Lord Nash. I was, I worked in University departments of education for over 10 years, in York and Liverpool and London and a big part of that job at A-level and PhD and research level.
-- MA level. I know that the value of that training was really essential. It is not enough that teachers have a very good subject knowledge. They also need to understand about professional concerns, such as pedagogy and effective pedagogy. They need to learn about behaviour, they need to learn about safeguarding. And in that initial teacher training is now completely transformed. The majority takes place in schools, there are various routes into QDS, it is much easier to work towards QDS, while you are training.
It is much easier to work towards it while you are a classroom assistant. Various governments over a period of years have made the roots into initial teacher training and qualified teacher status much better. -- QTS. It is an important qualification underpins not only the status of the profession but also the quality of the education, which children are getting. I will also add that I think this is a subject, this is a social justice issue. Because the fact is that the children who most need qualified teachers, in the subjects that the teaching or at the moment least likely to get them.
Evidence to the DfE, the 2025, shows clearly that pupils in schools with a high percentage of people premium are more likely than other pupils to be taught by an unqualified teacher be taught by an unqualified teacher They offer a narrower critic curriculum and are more likely to be taught by teachers teaching outside of the subject area and unqualified teachers. That's why the course of last year publishing chaired the independent teaching commission his report shaping the future of education examines the causes of the teaching supply crisis which has been two decades in the making and its effects on pupils in particular, and in particular the effects on people's he started life disadvantaged and most need qualified teachers to compensate for the 40% disadvantage Which they start school with which has been created before they start school.
Created through poverty. The A baseline, I think it's entirely necessary baseline, it's necessary to grow supply of qualified teachers who make the greatest contribution to raising standards of education. What is then a necessity is to keep teachers in the profession beyond early careers, the commission has made recommendations to achieve that. Teaching has been compared to a weakened workforce, we need to rectify that by creating the conditions where teachers feel able to commit for longer periods to the profession they enter to build on their experience and develop their skills.
As a start the government is absolutely right to establish a requirement that teachers have QTS and that all pupils and in particular the most deprived are taught by Colin by teachers. As I said this is a social justice issue, it's a professional issue and it is necessary. I do have some sympathy or Baroness Wolf issues around vocational training and I am interested what the exceptions would be for University technical colleges et cetera but as a basic bottom line if the teaching National Curriculum if the teaching National Curriculum Is a state school whether that be Academy or with local authority maintained school then as a baseline those teaching in it should have Qualified Teacher Status or be working towards it.
That's why I pose this rafter amendment would seek to weaken this very essential requirement in my view.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Arise to explain my amendment 437 a in relation to qualified teachers and to offer a different point of view to the noble Baroness of view to the noble Baroness of course, but we are trying to both achieve the same thing. The very
-- MA level. I know that the value of that training was really essential. It is not enough that teachers have a very good subject knowledge. They also need to understand about professional concerns, such as pedagogy and effective pedagogy. They need to learn about behaviour, they need to learn about safeguarding. And in that initial teacher training is now completely transformed. The majority takes place in schools, there are various routes into QDS, it is much easier to work towards QDS, while you are training.
It is much easier to work towards it while you are a classroom assistant. Various governments over a period of years have made the roots into initial teacher training and qualified teacher status much better. -- QTS. It is an important qualification underpins not only the status of the profession but also the quality of the education, which children are getting. I will also add that I think this is a subject, this is a social justice issue. Because the fact is that the children who most need qualified teachers, in the subjects that the teaching or at the moment least likely to get them.
Evidence to the DfE, the 2025, shows clearly that pupils in schools with a high percentage of people premium are more likely than other pupils to be taught by an unqualified teacher be taught by an unqualified teacher They offer a narrower critic curriculum and are more likely to be taught by teachers teaching outside of the subject area and unqualified teachers. That's why the course of last year publishing chaired the independent teaching commission his report shaping the future of education examines the causes of the teaching supply crisis which has been two decades in the making and its effects on pupils in particular, and in particular the effects on people's he started life disadvantaged and most need qualified teachers to compensate for the 40% disadvantage Which they start school with which has been created before they start school.
Created through poverty. The A baseline, I think it's entirely necessary baseline, it's necessary to grow supply of qualified teachers who make the greatest contribution to raising standards of education. What is then a necessity is to keep teachers in the profession beyond early careers, the commission has made recommendations to achieve that. Teaching has been compared to a weakened workforce, we need to rectify that by creating the conditions where teachers feel able to commit for longer periods to the profession they enter to build on their experience and develop their skills.
As a start the government is absolutely right to establish a requirement that teachers have QTS and that all pupils and in particular the most deprived are taught by Colin by teachers. As I said this is a social justice issue, it's a professional issue and it is necessary. I do have some sympathy or Baroness Wolf issues around vocational training and I am interested what the exceptions would be for University technical colleges et cetera but as a basic bottom line if the teaching National Curriculum if the teaching National Curriculum Is a state school whether that be Academy or with local authority maintained school then as a baseline those teaching in it should have Qualified Teacher Status or be working towards it.
That's why I pose this rafter amendment would seek to weaken this very essential requirement in my view.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Arise to explain my amendment 437 a in relation to qualified teachers and to offer a different point of view to the noble Baroness of view to the noble Baroness of course, but we are trying to both achieve the same thing. The very
18:18
Lord Agnew of Oulton (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Agnew of Oulton (Conservative)
achieve the same thing. The very first thing to establish if one doesn't unquestioningly accept the bureaucratic definition is what exactly is a qualified teacher? We have drifted into accepting that the postgraduate certificate in education, the PGCE is the gold standard. With reforms made by the last government the teacher training standards, the new inspection framework and accreditation exercise it has got better. But it isn't the be all and end all. What I'm trying to make at the start is it really the kitemark that we should use as the standard for good teachers? I the standard for good teachers? I put you to hypothetical but frequent sets of circumstances, a newly qualified graduate with a degree in same maths or one of the sciences, the person decides that they would like to spend the year to teaching in the degree they have specialised in.
Across the corridor we have a person of the same age you completed undergraduate degree in sociology or politics but she or he has completed their PGCE, they asked to teach maths. All other things being equal which would you rather have teaching your child the specialist subject? I know which one I would choose and But anyway what business is it of the DfE sitting remotely over 22,000 schools to be imposing rules like this? I have met heads who support both sides of these arguments.
So why aren't we letting them be the judge? For example in some parts of England such as London it is easier to recruit PGCE than it is in the province. How can bureaucrats and the DfE possibly know better how to run a school, we touched on that earlier. We have a mixed economy at the moment and thank goodness we do for reasons I will come to an a moment. Nor do I want noble Lords to think I am dead against the PGCE, the coalition government introduced the concept of school centred initial teaching training and I just finished my term as a trustee of the NIO T, The National Alliance That across the country set up at the behest of the DfE.
They helped increase the number of graduates and entering the program, indeed we have one in my Academy trust, we end up hiring many of our PGCE students to teach. So why fiddle around with this? What are you seeking to achieve other than mouthing slogans about the need to have qualified teachers in the classroom. I think it is insulting of those who have studied very demanding degrees and have acquired skills that are so badly needed in schools to be called unqualified. Particularly when most of these young people could go on into other more highly paid jobs.
But next we do turn to the elephant in the room, the shortage of teachers in the state system. Most recent DfE data I could find tells me for the period 23/24 there were 22,700 postgraduate trainees of which 21,210 achieved QTS status. However this is down from 22,437 in In 2021/22. Of those 21,210, 15,900 are teaching in state schools, a drop from 21,971 in 21/22. The data is inviolable. Haps the Minister has more up-to-date data. In terms of Shortages the DfE data tells me that for the most recent 24/25 year against the 21,210 I refer to, the estimated need was for over 33,000 trainees.
Secondary recruitment was only at 62% of target. Secondary there are acute shortfalls in maths, physics and computing. Respectably only finishing -- hitting 37, 31 and 43% of the DfE's targets and again perhaps the Minister can correct me on some of this. The next bit is what really breaks my heart and perhaps shows I have common cause with the Baroness, teacher shortages are especially acute in schools with disadvantaged people in takes. That breaks my heart, but I came into politics 15 years ago to go for that.
It is just getting worse. There are more vacancies, there remain open for longer and so it's the poor kids that suffer. The National Audit Office tells us in this report of April this year the teacher recruitment targets are being missed every year but one in the last 10, Baroness Bousted says it's two decades but this is a structural problem. The DfE have missed its targets in 13/18 subjects in the most recent year, this is despite the DfE recruitment budget of £700 million.
It would be interesting to see if that level of funding is sustained in this autumn's budget with all the other pressures the government places and I would be grateful if the Minister could enlighten us on that. This isn't just having a swipe at the Labour government, we struggle as well. Have no credible plan to turn the tide in forcing through this new measure would just make the job harder for everyone in the frontline with children being the losers. It will deter potentially excellent teachers, particularly in specialist subjects spending a few years in the teaching profession if they had to spend nine months training and probably pay for the privilege.
I accept there are some bursaries. Indeed the NAO adds that the percentage of less experienced teachers in the most disadvantaged schools is far higher than average schools to our earlier point. They Staff turnover and a higher percentage of unfilled vacancies. I haven't talked about retention in the interests of time broadly one third of secondary teachers leave within five years of joining the profession so we need to keep filling the final. The only way to hold teachers longer in my view would be to pay more in the early years which is not practical in the current circumstances, but also to support schools in taking much stronger action on bad behaviour which from my experiences why many leave and can you blame them? Particularly female teachers.
Then we have the cherry on the cake, teach first. Another great labour invention and responsible for pumping thousands of superb teachers into the state system over the last 20 years, around 16,000, some 150 are now Head Teachers and the proportion of teach first as you go into senior leadership roles is seven times higher than comparably qualified teachers. What training do they get? They get six weeks and then into the frontline. When some of these facts were presented to the government the best they could manage was well you can stay so don't worry.
So where is the intellectual coherence? My amendment is very straightforward, widen the definition of what a qualified teacher is to include degree qualified professionals who teach in qualified professionals who teach in this area of specialisation. This is, this clause is a classic example of why I get so frustrated with so many parts of this bill. Hundreds of hours of debate things like this that will only make it harder the people who are trying to improve education and particularly for those disadvantaged ones.
I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Arrives to speak to amendment 495 in the name of Lord Holmes to which
Across the corridor we have a person of the same age you completed undergraduate degree in sociology or politics but she or he has completed their PGCE, they asked to teach maths. All other things being equal which would you rather have teaching your child the specialist subject? I know which one I would choose and But anyway what business is it of the DfE sitting remotely over 22,000 schools to be imposing rules like this? I have met heads who support both sides of these arguments.
So why aren't we letting them be the judge? For example in some parts of England such as London it is easier to recruit PGCE than it is in the province. How can bureaucrats and the DfE possibly know better how to run a school, we touched on that earlier. We have a mixed economy at the moment and thank goodness we do for reasons I will come to an a moment. Nor do I want noble Lords to think I am dead against the PGCE, the coalition government introduced the concept of school centred initial teaching training and I just finished my term as a trustee of the NIO T, The National Alliance That across the country set up at the behest of the DfE.
They helped increase the number of graduates and entering the program, indeed we have one in my Academy trust, we end up hiring many of our PGCE students to teach. So why fiddle around with this? What are you seeking to achieve other than mouthing slogans about the need to have qualified teachers in the classroom. I think it is insulting of those who have studied very demanding degrees and have acquired skills that are so badly needed in schools to be called unqualified. Particularly when most of these young people could go on into other more highly paid jobs.
But next we do turn to the elephant in the room, the shortage of teachers in the state system. Most recent DfE data I could find tells me for the period 23/24 there were 22,700 postgraduate trainees of which 21,210 achieved QTS status. However this is down from 22,437 in In 2021/22. Of those 21,210, 15,900 are teaching in state schools, a drop from 21,971 in 21/22. The data is inviolable. Haps the Minister has more up-to-date data. In terms of Shortages the DfE data tells me that for the most recent 24/25 year against the 21,210 I refer to, the estimated need was for over 33,000 trainees.
Secondary recruitment was only at 62% of target. Secondary there are acute shortfalls in maths, physics and computing. Respectably only finishing -- hitting 37, 31 and 43% of the DfE's targets and again perhaps the Minister can correct me on some of this. The next bit is what really breaks my heart and perhaps shows I have common cause with the Baroness, teacher shortages are especially acute in schools with disadvantaged people in takes. That breaks my heart, but I came into politics 15 years ago to go for that.
It is just getting worse. There are more vacancies, there remain open for longer and so it's the poor kids that suffer. The National Audit Office tells us in this report of April this year the teacher recruitment targets are being missed every year but one in the last 10, Baroness Bousted says it's two decades but this is a structural problem. The DfE have missed its targets in 13/18 subjects in the most recent year, this is despite the DfE recruitment budget of £700 million.
It would be interesting to see if that level of funding is sustained in this autumn's budget with all the other pressures the government places and I would be grateful if the Minister could enlighten us on that. This isn't just having a swipe at the Labour government, we struggle as well. Have no credible plan to turn the tide in forcing through this new measure would just make the job harder for everyone in the frontline with children being the losers. It will deter potentially excellent teachers, particularly in specialist subjects spending a few years in the teaching profession if they had to spend nine months training and probably pay for the privilege.
I accept there are some bursaries. Indeed the NAO adds that the percentage of less experienced teachers in the most disadvantaged schools is far higher than average schools to our earlier point. They Staff turnover and a higher percentage of unfilled vacancies. I haven't talked about retention in the interests of time broadly one third of secondary teachers leave within five years of joining the profession so we need to keep filling the final. The only way to hold teachers longer in my view would be to pay more in the early years which is not practical in the current circumstances, but also to support schools in taking much stronger action on bad behaviour which from my experiences why many leave and can you blame them? Particularly female teachers.
Then we have the cherry on the cake, teach first. Another great labour invention and responsible for pumping thousands of superb teachers into the state system over the last 20 years, around 16,000, some 150 are now Head Teachers and the proportion of teach first as you go into senior leadership roles is seven times higher than comparably qualified teachers. What training do they get? They get six weeks and then into the frontline. When some of these facts were presented to the government the best they could manage was well you can stay so don't worry.
So where is the intellectual coherence? My amendment is very straightforward, widen the definition of what a qualified teacher is to include degree qualified professionals who teach in qualified professionals who teach in this area of specialisation. This is, this clause is a classic example of why I get so frustrated with so many parts of this bill. Hundreds of hours of debate things like this that will only make it harder the people who are trying to improve education and particularly for those disadvantaged ones.
I beg to move.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Arrives to speak to amendment 495 in the name of Lord Holmes to which
18:26
Baroness Grey-Thompson (Crossbench)
-
-
Baroness Grey-Thompson (Crossbench)
in the name of Lord Holmes to which my name is added. This amendment of the clause 62 six to insert a new clause around teacher training reviews. I declare an interest I'm president of the LGA chair and support Wales and also chair the Duke of Edinburgh awards which is actively looking at enrichment around the school day to help children develop most skills will help them in the whole of their lives. It feels like we've been discussing teacher training and physical activity for years and certainly around primary aged teacher training.
There's only about four years instruction given in terms of how to deliver physical education, it's really difficult subject to teach because even younger ages there's a huge range of capability in children. The reason this is important, it's not just about finding a new set of Olympians and Paralympian's, this is about developing physical activity for life. I believe this amendment is required because of the state of inactivity in England and the UK. Women and sport data shows that 80% of women are not fit enough to be healthy, UK active has published lots of research on BCG -- obesity rates of children which seems to be creamy -- creeping up and up while I acknowledge the school can't do everything around encouraging children to be fit and healthy and active, they can play a huge part.
If we look to another subject we don't expect children to be able to do trigonometry without teaching them the basics of maths, but we expect children to play sport without teaching the basics of physical literacy. I think it's really important we learn from elsewhere, in Wales back in 2012 and 2013 we came very close to getting physical literacy as the same status as literacy and numeracy within the school. It would be part of teacher training and also be measured by testing.
The importance of this is because it's about healthy mind body and spirit. And about developing that level of activity, we know people's relationship with physical activity they drop in and out especially girls dropped out at the ages of 18 and 13. I believe we have to do something to change that pattern of behaviour. I think this is also really important around disabled people, quite often PE teachers through lack of experience will still send disabled children to the library, that's actually happening more and more and you would think of the back of amazing Paralympic success there would be better attempts at inclusion but that's not happening.
A number of parents write to me to tell them that their children are being excluded from P lessons under health and safety rules or they are told that because there is not another disabled child in the class can't participate or play sport with anyone else. So they are excluded. His Majesty's Government already offers support for inclusion 2028 program, this is a step forward it's working with the sports youth trust and 50 league schools to develop this knowledge and I be interested in understanding how that is developing.
We just have to develop much wider support that the patent of inactivity are broken and we have a fitter and healthier nation.
There's only about four years instruction given in terms of how to deliver physical education, it's really difficult subject to teach because even younger ages there's a huge range of capability in children. The reason this is important, it's not just about finding a new set of Olympians and Paralympian's, this is about developing physical activity for life. I believe this amendment is required because of the state of inactivity in England and the UK. Women and sport data shows that 80% of women are not fit enough to be healthy, UK active has published lots of research on BCG -- obesity rates of children which seems to be creamy -- creeping up and up while I acknowledge the school can't do everything around encouraging children to be fit and healthy and active, they can play a huge part.
If we look to another subject we don't expect children to be able to do trigonometry without teaching them the basics of maths, but we expect children to play sport without teaching the basics of physical literacy. I think it's really important we learn from elsewhere, in Wales back in 2012 and 2013 we came very close to getting physical literacy as the same status as literacy and numeracy within the school. It would be part of teacher training and also be measured by testing.
The importance of this is because it's about healthy mind body and spirit. And about developing that level of activity, we know people's relationship with physical activity they drop in and out especially girls dropped out at the ages of 18 and 13. I believe we have to do something to change that pattern of behaviour. I think this is also really important around disabled people, quite often PE teachers through lack of experience will still send disabled children to the library, that's actually happening more and more and you would think of the back of amazing Paralympic success there would be better attempts at inclusion but that's not happening.
A number of parents write to me to tell them that their children are being excluded from P lessons under health and safety rules or they are told that because there is not another disabled child in the class can't participate or play sport with anyone else. So they are excluded. His Majesty's Government already offers support for inclusion 2028 program, this is a step forward it's working with the sports youth trust and 50 league schools to develop this knowledge and I be interested in understanding how that is developing.
We just have to develop much wider support that the patent of inactivity are broken and we have a fitter and healthier nation.
18:29
Baroness Sater (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Sater (Conservative)
It's always a pleasure to follow the noble Baroness and my noble friend I hope you don't mind. I wish to speak to amendment 47 and 495 in the name of my noble friend Lord Holmes of Richmond who deeply regrets he cannot be with us this afternoon. Or actually maybe this evening. I think amendment 437 speaks for itself, turning to amendment 495 to which I have attached my name and I have worked with Lord Moynihan on this amendment for quite some time.
Our concerns are the weaknesses of sport and physical literacy components of teacher training in the UK. Weaknesses are most pronounced for the generous primary school teachers who often lack sufficient training, confidence and practical opportunities. These issues are compounded by a low professional status for physical education within schools and not prioritised. There is also a minimum time obligation, primary teachers generally received little training in physical education during their Initial Teacher Training ITT programs, but once or citing an average of four to six hours.
This is widely seen as woefully inadequate for preparing them to deliver high quality PE. Trainees report insufficient exposure to the theory and practice of physical literacy, which includes developing movement skills, tactical knowledge and understanding health for a physically active life. Also the term physically literate -- physical literacy itself can be interpreted in different ways which can lead to muddled thinking and inconsistent delivery within the curriculum. Many primary teachers report a lack of subject knowledge which underlines the confidence in planning and delivery of PE.
The widespread practice of outsourcing PE provision to external sports coaches and companies whilst beneficially in itself, beneficial in itself, significantly reduces the opportunities for trainee teachers to practice teaching PE during their school's placement. Trainees often report no opportunity to teach PE at all as lessons are run by external professionals. Finally the problem of inconsistent provision. Teacher training and support for PE varies widely across different schools, reflecting different priorities, teacher expertise and available funding. Despite targeting, targeted funding like PE and sports premium financial limitations and high workloads often mean resources are not used efficiently to develop teacher skills.
Funding some time spent on external coaches instead of upscaling permanent staff. It is for these reasons that I beg to move my noble friend Lord Holmes of Richmond's amendments which of
Our concerns are the weaknesses of sport and physical literacy components of teacher training in the UK. Weaknesses are most pronounced for the generous primary school teachers who often lack sufficient training, confidence and practical opportunities. These issues are compounded by a low professional status for physical education within schools and not prioritised. There is also a minimum time obligation, primary teachers generally received little training in physical education during their Initial Teacher Training ITT programs, but once or citing an average of four to six hours.
This is widely seen as woefully inadequate for preparing them to deliver high quality PE. Trainees report insufficient exposure to the theory and practice of physical literacy, which includes developing movement skills, tactical knowledge and understanding health for a physically active life. Also the term physically literate -- physical literacy itself can be interpreted in different ways which can lead to muddled thinking and inconsistent delivery within the curriculum. Many primary teachers report a lack of subject knowledge which underlines the confidence in planning and delivery of PE.
The widespread practice of outsourcing PE provision to external sports coaches and companies whilst beneficially in itself, beneficial in itself, significantly reduces the opportunities for trainee teachers to practice teaching PE during their school's placement. Trainees often report no opportunity to teach PE at all as lessons are run by external professionals. Finally the problem of inconsistent provision. Teacher training and support for PE varies widely across different schools, reflecting different priorities, teacher expertise and available funding. Despite targeting, targeted funding like PE and sports premium financial limitations and high workloads often mean resources are not used efficiently to develop teacher skills.
Funding some time spent on external coaches instead of upscaling permanent staff. It is for these reasons that I beg to move my noble friend Lord Holmes of Richmond's amendments which of
18:33
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
-
-
Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
Are just briefly wants me to this group of amendments, the same vein as the Baroness Morris and Baroness Bousted. And emphasise that sense of that we do need qualified teachers, particularly for the most disadvantaged pupils, in our country. Prior to the pandemic, I was for seven years, a senior Executive at a supplement as once was. One of the things I did during that tenure was to set up the Institute which was the teacher training Institute, now the fifth largest qualifier of teachers in England.
And the main route that we opened up through the Institute was something that we branded straight to teaching. In essence it was the to teaching. In essence it was the opportunity for those people there is. They're on instructor grades of pay who had experience of teaching, to be assessed, for how closer to the teaching standards they would be and then a bespoke professional development program can be devised for them, so that they could then reach that set of standards and get QDS.
It was incidentally and I say this, to the noble Lord -- QTS. It was a surprise to me to learn that PGCE did not qualify you to teach. There is not an equivalence between the two. Qualified teacher status is a separate thing, but there is an assumption that PGCE, equals qualifying teacher status. And what that process of developing straight that process of developing straight to teaching taught me was there are plenty of people working in our schools, in this country, effectively as instructors who can be taken through to become qualified teachers, on the job, carrying on being paid, carrying on using experience and that can apply to those in vocational settings as well as in more academic settings.
That says to me that there are routes. We now have the teaching apprenticeship, the apprenticeships that have been opened up. For those people who have the sorts of qualifications and experience that we discussed in this debate, to be hired by schools and then within a reasonable time being taken into qualified teacher status. That is something that we should grab, because I think it is really important to value pedagogic training as well as subject knowledge. It is really important to value training in bullying, as referred to in amendment 439 in the name of Lord Storey.
It is really important that people should understand and be trained around special educational needs. It is important that they should be trained around physical literacy as explored by a Baroneseses at Grey- Thompson and Sata in their important speeches. -- Baroness Sater. Having training programs to achieve qualified teacher status for those who are brought into classrooms to teachers instructors are something that we should expect and as part of that move to every teacher becoming qualified. And then I would finally just add that I do support amendment 495 as moved by a Baroness, Baroness Sater and spoke to 2 by Baroness Grey-Thompson.
I have set out in the importance of physical literacy. Like them I was a member of your Lordships committee on the national plan for sport, which I hope we can have a chance to revisit and see whether we think that, what we recommended then remains valid for the new government to take forward. I also would support amendment 495 on the basis of some of the other things that are listed around a review of ITT. Things like financial literacy, AI literacy, media literacy.
These are become increasingly important issues that are neglected, currently, initial teacher training. I think it is timely, the Curriculum and Assessment Review has reported, for there then to be a review of whether or not, they need to change aspects of initial teacher training to take account for that review.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I stand as a secondary school
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I stand as a secondary school teacher and I'm a bit conflicted by this group of amendments. Noble this group of amendments. Noble Lords have highlighted the benefits Lords have highlighted the benefits of getting industry experts to teach in schools. We use architects at our school to teach at the architecture school to teach at the architecture program and I recently went into a UTC where they get employers in, to UTC where they get employers in, to set students projects and then they set students projects and then they come in regularly to look at them, so that the students get real world, real industry training.
And I think it is unrealistic to expect them to get teaching qualifications. I'm afraid my Lords, I cannot yet, afraid my Lords, I cannot yet, amendment 438 go. I have admired the optimism and the creativity of the noble Lords amendments and I acknowledge the sterling work that acknowledge the sterling work that the electives of the home schooling the electives of the home schooling community is doing. In this House have undertaken a formal teacher have undertaken a formal teacher training, I have a QTS.
Which isn't the gold standard anymore. I had one disastrous attempt at homeschooling, during lockdown I tried to teach my primary school age daughter maths and she is still shouting at me, even now. To say that somebody is, whose only experienced home schooling can then go from that, to teaching a 32 boisterous students, last period, on a Friday, without any formal training, or import any any formal training, or import any training is optimistic at best.
The Lord was not in his place, unwittingly belittles two years of unwittingly belittles two years of intense training for mainstream teachers. teachers.
And the main route that we opened up through the Institute was something that we branded straight to teaching. In essence it was the to teaching. In essence it was the opportunity for those people there is. They're on instructor grades of pay who had experience of teaching, to be assessed, for how closer to the teaching standards they would be and then a bespoke professional development program can be devised for them, so that they could then reach that set of standards and get QDS.
It was incidentally and I say this, to the noble Lord -- QTS. It was a surprise to me to learn that PGCE did not qualify you to teach. There is not an equivalence between the two. Qualified teacher status is a separate thing, but there is an assumption that PGCE, equals qualifying teacher status. And what that process of developing straight that process of developing straight to teaching taught me was there are plenty of people working in our schools, in this country, effectively as instructors who can be taken through to become qualified teachers, on the job, carrying on being paid, carrying on using experience and that can apply to those in vocational settings as well as in more academic settings.
That says to me that there are routes. We now have the teaching apprenticeship, the apprenticeships that have been opened up. For those people who have the sorts of qualifications and experience that we discussed in this debate, to be hired by schools and then within a reasonable time being taken into qualified teacher status. That is something that we should grab, because I think it is really important to value pedagogic training as well as subject knowledge. It is really important to value training in bullying, as referred to in amendment 439 in the name of Lord Storey.
It is really important that people should understand and be trained around special educational needs. It is important that they should be trained around physical literacy as explored by a Baroneseses at Grey- Thompson and Sata in their important speeches. -- Baroness Sater. Having training programs to achieve qualified teacher status for those who are brought into classrooms to teachers instructors are something that we should expect and as part of that move to every teacher becoming qualified. And then I would finally just add that I do support amendment 495 as moved by a Baroness, Baroness Sater and spoke to 2 by Baroness Grey-Thompson.
I have set out in the importance of physical literacy. Like them I was a member of your Lordships committee on the national plan for sport, which I hope we can have a chance to revisit and see whether we think that, what we recommended then remains valid for the new government to take forward. I also would support amendment 495 on the basis of some of the other things that are listed around a review of ITT. Things like financial literacy, AI literacy, media literacy.
These are become increasingly important issues that are neglected, currently, initial teacher training. I think it is timely, the Curriculum and Assessment Review has reported, for there then to be a review of whether or not, they need to change aspects of initial teacher training to take account for that review.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I stand as a secondary school
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I stand as a secondary school teacher and I'm a bit conflicted by this group of amendments. Noble this group of amendments. Noble Lords have highlighted the benefits Lords have highlighted the benefits of getting industry experts to teach in schools. We use architects at our school to teach at the architecture school to teach at the architecture program and I recently went into a UTC where they get employers in, to UTC where they get employers in, to set students projects and then they set students projects and then they come in regularly to look at them, so that the students get real world, real industry training.
And I think it is unrealistic to expect them to get teaching qualifications. I'm afraid my Lords, I cannot yet, afraid my Lords, I cannot yet, amendment 438 go. I have admired the optimism and the creativity of the noble Lords amendments and I acknowledge the sterling work that acknowledge the sterling work that the electives of the home schooling the electives of the home schooling community is doing. In this House have undertaken a formal teacher have undertaken a formal teacher training, I have a QTS.
Which isn't the gold standard anymore. I had one disastrous attempt at homeschooling, during lockdown I tried to teach my primary school age daughter maths and she is still shouting at me, even now. To say that somebody is, whose only experienced home schooling can then go from that, to teaching a 32 boisterous students, last period, on a Friday, without any formal training, or import any any formal training, or import any training is optimistic at best.
The Lord was not in his place, unwittingly belittles two years of unwittingly belittles two years of intense training for mainstream teachers. teachers.
18:39
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
I would like to support the noble Baroness Ray Thompson and say that physical education is one of those things which we all do cry and then think somebody else should be doing. The fact of the matter is that there are certain physical skills, in need, how to move your feet, how to hold a racket. I say that with a degree of, shall we say fear and in front of a Baroness Sater. There are certain basic skills you will need all the time to get the best out of that skill and actually see it.
If you do not have it there you are not going to find out, when it comes to the how to integrate the disabilities, in PE lessons you will need some training. You will need to structure, if you turn around and say this is possible. Please make sure it happens, in taking a step further forward. To a degree of knowledge, it is required. We have just mentioned that the special educational needs is a factor and I have managed to make a couple without mentioning it.
If you have got special educational needs and somebody doesn't understand what you are about and they're trying to teach you, the chances are you are going to fail. Oh everybody just takes notes. One person whose dyspraxia can't do it and to people won't be to read them back and get it down in time. You have got some degree of knowledge. Those are fairly commonly occurring problems. You will need some training somewhere in this. I do not say the existing pathways are always there, because if they were there I wouldn't be putting it forward in the first place.
We actually do need to have that degree of training or at least awareness to say, right, I do not how to know how you do this, can you defer it with another pathway. I look forward to exploring this, in this bill and in future bills to make sure that we get something in place that means that more teachers can become teachers with special educational needs. More of the same it doesn't work, because
**** Possible New Speaker ****
what they got at the moment. I want to come in on this 1 to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I want to come in on this 1 to inject a note of pragmatism into the
If you do not have it there you are not going to find out, when it comes to the how to integrate the disabilities, in PE lessons you will need some training. You will need to structure, if you turn around and say this is possible. Please make sure it happens, in taking a step further forward. To a degree of knowledge, it is required. We have just mentioned that the special educational needs is a factor and I have managed to make a couple without mentioning it.
If you have got special educational needs and somebody doesn't understand what you are about and they're trying to teach you, the chances are you are going to fail. Oh everybody just takes notes. One person whose dyspraxia can't do it and to people won't be to read them back and get it down in time. You have got some degree of knowledge. Those are fairly commonly occurring problems. You will need some training somewhere in this. I do not say the existing pathways are always there, because if they were there I wouldn't be putting it forward in the first place.
We actually do need to have that degree of training or at least awareness to say, right, I do not how to know how you do this, can you defer it with another pathway. I look forward to exploring this, in this bill and in future bills to make sure that we get something in place that means that more teachers can become teachers with special educational needs. More of the same it doesn't work, because
**** Possible New Speaker ****
what they got at the moment. I want to come in on this 1 to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I want to come in on this 1 to inject a note of pragmatism into the
18:42
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
inject a note of pragmatism into the discussion. First of all, I want to observe that the current freedom doesn't seem to have been creating significant problems in practice. So to ask that classic question what is the problem that the clause in the bill is trying to solve. Secondly it is absolutely right and the noble Lord, Lord night described the excellent programs that encourage people to move from structured teaching assistant roles and qualified teacher status. Those are excellent and of course they should exist and of course people should be encouraged.
But the pragmatic point is to think about all the people who might choose to be teachers and choose instead, for example to go off and be tutors. Lavishing their skills and expertise on a very small subject of teachers parents teachers can afford to pay and a loss to the state system, because they simply won't go down that path. And for that reason, I want to support the amendments put forward, by my noble friend Baroness Barran and also the very pragmatic amendment proposed at the start of this group, by the noble Lady, Baroness Wolf of Dulwich.
As a way of making sure that the potential impact of this clause is not the opposite of what I'm quite sure the government is intending. It is absolutely right to want to upscale teachers and make sure that as much teaching as possible happens with qualified teachers but it will be desperately sad if many subjects, a lot of the potential school experience for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
millions of children was die looted, for this purity of principle. I quite agree with my noble
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I quite agree with my noble friend, the current system doesn't friend, the current system doesn't create problems because most schools are teams. And if you really need a
But the pragmatic point is to think about all the people who might choose to be teachers and choose instead, for example to go off and be tutors. Lavishing their skills and expertise on a very small subject of teachers parents teachers can afford to pay and a loss to the state system, because they simply won't go down that path. And for that reason, I want to support the amendments put forward, by my noble friend Baroness Barran and also the very pragmatic amendment proposed at the start of this group, by the noble Lady, Baroness Wolf of Dulwich.
As a way of making sure that the potential impact of this clause is not the opposite of what I'm quite sure the government is intending. It is absolutely right to want to upscale teachers and make sure that as much teaching as possible happens with qualified teachers but it will be desperately sad if many subjects, a lot of the potential school experience for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
millions of children was die looted, for this purity of principle. I quite agree with my noble
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I quite agree with my noble friend, the current system doesn't friend, the current system doesn't create problems because most schools are teams. And if you really need a
18:44
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Lucas (Conservative)
are teams. And if you really need a particular skill and you bring in someone with that skill and lacks other skills that you need to be able to teach world, the community rallies around and will make sure that together you work and that the experience for children is good. What I would like to see if the system is not one that says go away. We do not want you unless you have got QTS first. One that welcomes people in and says let's bring you one.
The sort of thing that Lord Knight was describing. That attitude to how do we bring in the skills that we need seems to me the right one. There are lots of people out there who could contribute their skills, if it is made possible, for them to do that, in a way that works for them. As my noble friend said there are a lot of young people who tutor and to do it really well. Develop therefore an interest in the idea that they might be teachers.
But to get there, in a way that suits them. There are lots of older people, 50s and 60s were coming to the end of their career, they know they're not going to get anywhere else particular. Maybe they are consultants, or in IT and they just don't want to sit down and write on a computer system. They would love to get involved with young people and helping them on. You have got to make it easy for them. You have got to find a way in for them.
To create some thing as inflexible as this bill does seems to me to. The other thing I would urge the government is to really take a look at what people are being taught. In getting qualified teacher status. It ought to be, a really prestigious useful qualification. The sort of thing you get early on in your career, because it teaches you so much. You were going to use in all sorts of other aspects of life. But the whole structure of it seems to have turned inwards.
Just teaching the things that are useful in teaching, not help you expand that into something which is a really broad skill, for the rest of your life. I think if qualified teacher status, some people said, not why should I do a Masters, just a boring year, doing a pointless exercise, if I could do QTS will have a whole range of skills that any employer will appreciate. I will find a deep use for my life. I can't see why it can't be like that. The skills that Lord Knight described exactly the sort of things you want going through life.
That is not the way that QTS is taught. I do think we
The sort of thing that Lord Knight was describing. That attitude to how do we bring in the skills that we need seems to me the right one. There are lots of people out there who could contribute their skills, if it is made possible, for them to do that, in a way that works for them. As my noble friend said there are a lot of young people who tutor and to do it really well. Develop therefore an interest in the idea that they might be teachers.
But to get there, in a way that suits them. There are lots of older people, 50s and 60s were coming to the end of their career, they know they're not going to get anywhere else particular. Maybe they are consultants, or in IT and they just don't want to sit down and write on a computer system. They would love to get involved with young people and helping them on. You have got to make it easy for them. You have got to find a way in for them.
To create some thing as inflexible as this bill does seems to me to. The other thing I would urge the government is to really take a look at what people are being taught. In getting qualified teacher status. It ought to be, a really prestigious useful qualification. The sort of thing you get early on in your career, because it teaches you so much. You were going to use in all sorts of other aspects of life. But the whole structure of it seems to have turned inwards.
Just teaching the things that are useful in teaching, not help you expand that into something which is a really broad skill, for the rest of your life. I think if qualified teacher status, some people said, not why should I do a Masters, just a boring year, doing a pointless exercise, if I could do QTS will have a whole range of skills that any employer will appreciate. I will find a deep use for my life. I can't see why it can't be like that. The skills that Lord Knight described exactly the sort of things you want going through life.
That is not the way that QTS is taught. I do think we
18:48
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
crisis in the supply of teachers. Not just the numbers, but also as he said in specialism will stop there said in specialism will stop there is also a great worry that we are seeing the lowest number of people seeing the lowest number of people mentioned to go into teaching and also worry we are seeing the highest number of teachers leaving early. number of teachers leaving early. His solution is not my solution, I've said in this House on many I've said in this House on many occasions the most important thing in a child's life is the quality of the teacher.
I don't think as a society we value teachers. You can remember, having a qualification doesn't make you a good teacher, we doesn't make you a good teacher, we can remember in the '40s, 30s, maybe can remember in the '40s, 30s, maybe in the '50s were somebody with a university degree would come out of university and think they could university and think they could teach. And you can't always. teach. And you can't always. Occasionally they could do it. Those who couldn't do it at secondary modern schools quickly tried to transfer to grammar schools where they thought it might be easier to they thought it might be easier to do.
But as the noble Lord rightly said if you've got in the playground or on the sports field some challenging pupils haring around and you haven't gotten understanding of child development you haven't gotten understanding of Hagar management, you just can't cope. You wouldn't for example expect somebody who's got a law degree to suddenly step into a court, you just wouldn't have it. We've got to work out how on earth we can ensure that people want earth we can ensure that people want to become teachers.
It's not just also about training to become a teacher, we have to support them when they are in teaching and it's not just about salary although that helps, it's about continuous professional development, it's about campaigns that we have constantly go on about about workload, the number of times teachers are said to me if we could just get on with the job of teaching without having to do all these other tasks. That doesn't stop visitors coming into school, it doesn't stop experts you have a particular knowledge being linked to at school and coming from time to time to talk to those children, by the way high-level teaching assistants can teach in schools.
Teaching assistants level 2 can teach as long as they are supervised by the teacher. Actually maybe we should be encouraging high-level teaching assistants and teaching assistants to go on to become horrified teachers themselves. We cannot have in our schools a situation where qualified teachers are undervalued and we increasingly think the answer is to bring in unqualified so-called experts. If I could turn to my amendment which are a bit surprised is in this group and this is on bullying, I think it's one of the other groups later on as well, I think it's quite worrying that currently we are talking about 35% of 10 to 15-year-olds have experienced bullying of some sort, in 2023 1.5 million children suffered bullying and bullying happens in all sorts of ways it can be physical, it can be emotional it can be verbal, it can be cyber- bullying.
We seem to think that the important thing is to sort out mobile phones and that. Being. It will stop laying and also make pupils more attentive to learning. I have a great deal of sympathy with that is probably we all do, but also mobile phones can be used increasingly for bullying pupils as well. When people is bullied, then a number of things happen. It's not just physical weather might be bruising or whatever, it's also emotional of course, it also leads to increasing absence from school where they are frightened to go to school because the bully might be there, so that affects the school attendance and we talked at length about how important school attendance is.
It will affect their grades when they come to do their exams, they will not be handing in homework and so it goes on. We have to actually ensure that we take the whole issue of bullying seriously which I know the government does, we have to make sure as spelt out in the amendment some of the things that we need to do. I hope when we come back to this at a later stage
**** Possible New Speaker ****
hope to look at this in more detail. This group has listed another
I don't think as a society we value teachers. You can remember, having a qualification doesn't make you a good teacher, we doesn't make you a good teacher, we can remember in the '40s, 30s, maybe can remember in the '40s, 30s, maybe in the '50s were somebody with a university degree would come out of university and think they could university and think they could teach. And you can't always. teach. And you can't always. Occasionally they could do it. Those who couldn't do it at secondary modern schools quickly tried to transfer to grammar schools where they thought it might be easier to they thought it might be easier to do.
But as the noble Lord rightly said if you've got in the playground or on the sports field some challenging pupils haring around and you haven't gotten understanding of child development you haven't gotten understanding of Hagar management, you just can't cope. You wouldn't for example expect somebody who's got a law degree to suddenly step into a court, you just wouldn't have it. We've got to work out how on earth we can ensure that people want earth we can ensure that people want to become teachers.
It's not just also about training to become a teacher, we have to support them when they are in teaching and it's not just about salary although that helps, it's about continuous professional development, it's about campaigns that we have constantly go on about about workload, the number of times teachers are said to me if we could just get on with the job of teaching without having to do all these other tasks. That doesn't stop visitors coming into school, it doesn't stop experts you have a particular knowledge being linked to at school and coming from time to time to talk to those children, by the way high-level teaching assistants can teach in schools.
Teaching assistants level 2 can teach as long as they are supervised by the teacher. Actually maybe we should be encouraging high-level teaching assistants and teaching assistants to go on to become horrified teachers themselves. We cannot have in our schools a situation where qualified teachers are undervalued and we increasingly think the answer is to bring in unqualified so-called experts. If I could turn to my amendment which are a bit surprised is in this group and this is on bullying, I think it's one of the other groups later on as well, I think it's quite worrying that currently we are talking about 35% of 10 to 15-year-olds have experienced bullying of some sort, in 2023 1.5 million children suffered bullying and bullying happens in all sorts of ways it can be physical, it can be emotional it can be verbal, it can be cyber- bullying.
We seem to think that the important thing is to sort out mobile phones and that. Being. It will stop laying and also make pupils more attentive to learning. I have a great deal of sympathy with that is probably we all do, but also mobile phones can be used increasingly for bullying pupils as well. When people is bullied, then a number of things happen. It's not just physical weather might be bruising or whatever, it's also emotional of course, it also leads to increasing absence from school where they are frightened to go to school because the bully might be there, so that affects the school attendance and we talked at length about how important school attendance is.
It will affect their grades when they come to do their exams, they will not be handing in homework and so it goes on. We have to actually ensure that we take the whole issue of bullying seriously which I know the government does, we have to make sure as spelt out in the amendment some of the things that we need to do. I hope when we come back to this at a later stage
**** Possible New Speaker ****
hope to look at this in more detail. This group has listed another
18:52
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This group has listed another excellent debate and as other noble excellent debate and as other noble Lords have said, on these benches we are just remain unclear what problem the government is trying to solve. The government's own data shows that the percentage of teachers with -- without a formal teaching qualification has been pretty stable in both primary and secondary schools for the past 10 years, it sits at about one% in primary and between 1.5 and two% in secondary.
That's about 6,000 children -- 6,000 teachers out of a workforce of over 450,000, we are talking about tiny numbers, largely in specialist subjects which has not changed over a very long time. I couldn't find and I did look for any evidence which suggests that teachers without formal teaching qualification provide lower quality education which is not in any way to disagree with anyone, any noble Lord who has spoken already, we know that the quality of the teacher at the front of the classroom is the single biggest and most important influence on the education that the child receives.
The government has argued that one wouldn't want to be seen by none qualified lawyer or an unqualified dentist, but as other noble Lords have said, any of us if asked would you like your child to be taught by a qualified or unqualified teacher we would say a qualified to. But as I think Baroness Wolf said, would you like to be taught by someone with a physics degree and 10 years in the industry or someone with a degree in English and QTS and I think to be fair the answers might be different.
So amendments 437 and 437 a and the names of Lord Holmes of Richmond and Lord Agnew have my support because they just apply common sense, focusing on a combination of specific subject expertise at degree level in the case of Lord Agnew's amendment and demonstrable competence in teaching. Now having listened to the debate and beginning to wonder whether actually given the tiny number really of unqualified teachers in the system whether this whole clause isn't a bit of a red herring.
So we have a number of routes. There is the assessment only route to get QTS, where a school or initial teacher training a skit is able to award Qualified Teacher Status to somebody who has, they obviously read Lord Agnew's amendment, GCSEs in English and maths, degree that demonstrate suitability, so forgotten assessment only route we've got high-level teaching assistants which I think Lord Storey referred to in we've also got teachers from Effie colleges with QT LS rather than QTS you can currently teach in secondary schools actually are full of those roots are followed maybe we close roots are followed maybe we close this I would argue inconsequential gap in a way that would allow the government to say that everybody now has QTS, but it doesn't really change anything on the ground and Lord Blunkett is not in this place he talked earlier about the public are about, I think the public are about governments focusing on real issues rather than this which feels like a slightly contracted problem.
My amendments in this group follow a familiar pattern, by calling for the clause not some part of the bill and offering the government the logical, simple course of action, just as Noni this clause unless the Minister can give us evidence of the harm being done although outcomes for children from from teachers without QTS. The other amendment six to limit the damage done to schools from the clause as drafted particularly the schools we all care about, the noble Baroness talked about, Lord Agnew talked about schools in the most disadvantaged communities so my amendment 436 exam shortage subjects from the constraints of the clause in my amendment 4366B gives schools five years rather than one in which time the teacher has to achieve a teaching convocation and this is particularly important and I hope the noble Baroness when she comes just talked will comment on this for special schools where the percentage of teachers without a teaching qualification is often higher.
I've also added my name to amendment 436 a in the name of Baroness Wolf which limits this measure to caucus objects -- core subjects in the National Curriculum and the noble Lady spoke with enormous experience and insight into the potential impacts of this measure, particularly in relation to technical and vocational qualifications I think Lord Storey gave the government the answer to at least a start on reducing bullying in schools weight reducing a smartphone ban which I'm hoping the noble Ladies new ministerial colleague will persuade her of because apparently in another life he thought it was a good idea.
Enclosing the issue this clause raises a point of principle about autonomy and accountability unlike all others it is easy to say this clause on its own won't be too harmful and that may not be tree but overall the bill is fundamentally centralising and will undo the gradients -- ingredients which made English education improved so much over the past 14 years. On these benches we really deeply oppose the principle of clawing back the discretionary given to school and trust leaders, we remain baffled by the government wanting to undo what has worked well and does not rather focus on areas that really do deserve their attention, we would rather see the expansion of freedoms to maintained schools than the withdrawal from academies.
I beg to move.
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
This group has listed another excellent debate and as other noble excellent debate and as other noble Lords have said, on these benches we are just remain unclear what problem the government is trying to solve. The government's own data shows that the percentage of teachers with -- without a formal teaching qualification has been pretty stable in both primary and secondary schools for the past 10 years, it sits at about one% in primary and between 1.5 and two% in secondary.
That's about 6,000 children -- 6,000 teachers out of a workforce of over 450,000, we are talking about tiny numbers, largely in specialist subjects which has not changed over a very long time. I couldn't find and I did look for any evidence which suggests that teachers without formal teaching qualification provide lower quality education which is not in any way to disagree with anyone, any noble Lord who has spoken already, we know that the quality of the teacher at the front of the classroom is the single biggest and most important influence on the education that the child receives.
The government has argued that one wouldn't want to be seen by none qualified lawyer or an unqualified dentist, but as other noble Lords have said, any of us if asked would you like your child to be taught by a qualified or unqualified teacher we would say a qualified to. But as I think Baroness Wolf said, would you like to be taught by someone with a physics degree and 10 years in the industry or someone with a degree in English and QTS and I think to be fair the answers might be different.
So amendments 437 and 437 a and the names of Lord Holmes of Richmond and Lord Agnew have my support because they just apply common sense, focusing on a combination of specific subject expertise at degree level in the case of Lord Agnew's amendment and demonstrable competence in teaching. Now having listened to the debate and beginning to wonder whether actually given the tiny number really of unqualified teachers in the system whether this whole clause isn't a bit of a red herring.
So we have a number of routes. There is the assessment only route to get QTS, where a school or initial teacher training a skit is able to award Qualified Teacher Status to somebody who has, they obviously read Lord Agnew's amendment, GCSEs in English and maths, degree that demonstrate suitability, so forgotten assessment only route we've got high-level teaching assistants which I think Lord Storey referred to in we've also got teachers from Effie colleges with QT LS rather than QTS you can currently teach in secondary schools actually are full of those roots are followed maybe we close roots are followed maybe we close this I would argue inconsequential gap in a way that would allow the government to say that everybody now has QTS, but it doesn't really change anything on the ground and Lord Blunkett is not in this place he talked earlier about the public are about, I think the public are about governments focusing on real issues rather than this which feels like a slightly contracted problem.
My amendments in this group follow a familiar pattern, by calling for the clause not some part of the bill and offering the government the logical, simple course of action, just as Noni this clause unless the Minister can give us evidence of the harm being done although outcomes for children from from teachers without QTS. The other amendment six to limit the damage done to schools from the clause as drafted particularly the schools we all care about, the noble Baroness talked about, Lord Agnew talked about schools in the most disadvantaged communities so my amendment 436 exam shortage subjects from the constraints of the clause in my amendment 4366B gives schools five years rather than one in which time the teacher has to achieve a teaching convocation and this is particularly important and I hope the noble Baroness when she comes just talked will comment on this for special schools where the percentage of teachers without a teaching qualification is often higher.
I've also added my name to amendment 436 a in the name of Baroness Wolf which limits this measure to caucus objects -- core subjects in the National Curriculum and the noble Lady spoke with enormous experience and insight into the potential impacts of this measure, particularly in relation to technical and vocational qualifications I think Lord Storey gave the government the answer to at least a start on reducing bullying in schools weight reducing a smartphone ban which I'm hoping the noble Ladies new ministerial colleague will persuade her of because apparently in another life he thought it was a good idea.
Enclosing the issue this clause raises a point of principle about autonomy and accountability unlike all others it is easy to say this clause on its own won't be too harmful and that may not be tree but overall the bill is fundamentally centralising and will undo the gradients -- ingredients which made English education improved so much over the past 14 years. On these benches we really deeply oppose the principle of clawing back the discretionary given to school and trust leaders, we remain baffled by the government wanting to undo what has worked well and does not rather focus on areas that really do deserve their attention, we would rather see the expansion of freedoms to maintained schools than the withdrawal from academies.
I beg to move.
19:00
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
Teaching is a profession and we are unapologetic about having a high bar for training and qualification, it is what parents, head teachers and government should rightly expect. Which is why this government committed to this measure in its manifesto. It will ensure that new teachers have the essential training and induction they need to help children achieve. Qualified Teacher Status is not as has been suggested by some bureaucratic certification. The vast majority of teachers who gain QTS do so through initial teacher training delivered by accredited providers and inspected by Ofsted.
Regardless of the type of ITT course or provider, all Initial Teacher Training must incorporate the content defined in the Initial the content defined in the Initial As well as the importance of specialism, it helps children learn, adapt teaching to meet the need of all pupils including those with special educational needs and disabilities. Cutie enables early career teachers to access two years of high quality of induction of high quality of induction support.
-- QTS. Specialisation is important, but so is specialisation of teaching itself. My noble friend the noble Lord Hampton who is becoming my honourable friend rightly identified the range of challenges over and above subject specialism that it involves and I reflect on my own experience as a teacher for 11 years in a range of schools where I'm afraid my Oxford degree would not have been sufficient on its own to enable me to do right by the children that I was fortunate enough to teach during those 11 years.
We are continuing this flagship teacher training framework. A fact of the previous government, and we will ensure the best available evidence will teach teachers about the critical areas that define great teaching. We have already committed to review of the framework content in 2027 to ensure it continues to provide the best support based on the most up-to-date evidence. It is important for teacher retention, well-being, but a new teachers receive high-quality training and support that allows them to thrive in the fashion.
Clause 46 continues to raise standards and builds on the earlier reforms, and will ensure new teachers and children they teach have the benefit of evidence-based professional training regardless of whether they are in a local authority maintained school, or an academy school. I hope the Committee will agree the clause will stand part of the bill. Turning to the particular point raised in the amendment, amendment 436 a in the name of Baroness Wolf, could I clarify for the noble lady that 16- 19 academies would not be required to meet the requirements in the clause.
The noble Lady made a substantial impact in establishing recognition for the skills and experience teachers of vocational subjects can bring to the classroom and I understand that there are occasions where schools may need to employ experts and specialists who do not have QTS. Schools can lead experts to have particular part of a curriculum and they can lead vocational courses. Extensions are set out in existing regulation. They allow for vocational courses to be led by individuals without Q TS and exemptions include teachers working under supervision.
This does not mean a qualified teacher needs to be physically in the classroom. I think it might be helpful for noble Lords if I sent out further information about the exemptions which I think would alleviate some of the concerns noble Lords raised about some of the good practice that is already happening. We have committed to updating and clarifying regulations so that schools including academies can be confident in using them and we will produce guidance for schools.
Turning to amendments 437 and 437 a in the name of Lord Holmes of Richmond and Lord Agnew of Oulton which would broaden the requirement to be qualified to include other expertise or qualifications. I appreciate the recognition of the value experts from other professions can bring to the classroom. Great teaching relies on expertise that goes beyond subject knowledge. These amendments are unnecessary because of the existing exemption to the requirement for QTS that allows a hunk recruited subject expert as the noble Lord Lucas suggested it to welcome them into school and then to gain QTS through the route.
It ensures they meet the standards and have skills and experience needed to be successful in their role. There are exemptions that allow for instructors with special qualifications or experience to teach part of the curriculum or work under the supervision of a teacher under the supervision of a teacher with QTS. They can gain it while ensuring that all of their children they are teaching achieve. Turning to amendment 438 seeking to provide fast track access to QTS a pathway to parents who are home educators.
To be awarded the status, they must meet teacher standards which set out critical professional skills and experience that schools, parents and children rightly expect from teachers. The noble Lord Hampton identified the real distinction between teaching your own child at home and the skills necessary to teach a larger number of pupils with all of the other responsibilities teaching brings in a school. It would be inappropriate to lower these professional standards through a fast track system for any group in this way.
Turning to amendment 439 and 495 in the name of Lord Storey and Lord Holmes of Richmond. These amendments focus on addressing anti-bullying as part of teacher training and establishing a review of teacher training. I agree with the noble Lord story that every child has the right to feel safe, valued and respected at school. What the noble Lord proposed is important and this is already in hand. Schools are required to have a behaviour policy with measures to prevent bullying.
Schools develop an anti- bullying strategy that suits their setting which includes ensuring staff get the right anti-bullying training. Starting from this month, all ITT courses leading to. QTS Will respond to bullying that threatens physical or emotional safety. The OFSTED expects and framework has long included an evaluation of how schools approach and prevent bullying as well. In particular, I recognise a case made by Baroness Grey-Thompson and Baroness Hayter about a range of areas that must be covered in initial teacher training particularly with emphasis on how to develop the teaching of sport and literacy.
As I have previously outlined, we committed to a review of the content of the initial of the content of the initial teacher training and early career framework in 2027 to ensure high- quality evidence-based training and support for trainee and early career teachers and many teachers identified in this amendment will be part of that consideration. Turning to amendment 436 b and 430 6C that to amendment 436 b and 430 6C that looks at the requirement for QTS in the time to gain it in an exemption for teachers of shortage subjects.
The previous government the noble lady was part of recognised the importance of new teachers getting professional training that they need. This amendment denies new teachers high-quality training and induction precisely when they need it most at the start of their professional careers. Amendment 436 b can lead to unqualified teachers to leaving the profession and those going to another school for the deadline may wait even longer to gain the training and qualifications to which all teachers should be entitled. This risks a negative impact on the quality of teaching and retention of teachers.
We do not want the requirement for Q TS to hold up school recruitment processes and we are updating regulations to clarify schools will be able to recruit unqualified teachers and that these teachers will have three terms to secure a place on an appropriate route to QTS. While I recognise the challenges around teaching recruitment we have inherited, the solution should not be to embed lower standards for shortage subjects into primary legislation. I recognise the challenge made by noble Lords about wouldn't you prefer a properly qualified teacher to an unqualified teacher? I do not accept the defeatism of those that suggest the only way to put good teachers in front of our children is to remove or water down or reduce the professional training that we expect of them.
That is why this government has taken action to ensure we are recruiting and retaining more teachers. It is why we have been willing as one of our first actions to ensure teachers received a 5.5% pay rise from September 2024 and building on this in May 2025 announcing a further 4% pay award. This is an increase in pay for teachers of almost 10% over two years and our investment is starting to deliver. The special secondary school workforce has grown by 2346 full-time equivalents over the last year.
Of course, the best recruitment strategy is retention strategy and we are committed to working with sector partners to reduce workload, improve well-being and enable greater flexible working so teachers not only stay in the profession but thrive and alongside that we have targeted retention incentive, particularly focused on those subjects where it has been difficult to recruit the sort of specialist teachers we want to see in the classroom, maths, physics, chemistry and music teachers in those who work in disadvantaged schools.
Amendment 436 c creates uncertainty for schools and teachers as the teachers they employ could move in and out of the requirement for QTS depending on ITT recruitment data from the most recent years. It would change the requirements of QTS in local authority maintained schools and special schools which are already required to employ teachers with Q TS. I hope for the reasons I outlined supported by the action this government is taking to ensure there are specialist qualified teachers in all of our schools, I ask noble Lords to withdraw their amendments.
Regardless of the type of ITT course or provider, all Initial Teacher Training must incorporate the content defined in the Initial the content defined in the Initial As well as the importance of specialism, it helps children learn, adapt teaching to meet the need of all pupils including those with special educational needs and disabilities. Cutie enables early career teachers to access two years of high quality of induction of high quality of induction support.
-- QTS. Specialisation is important, but so is specialisation of teaching itself. My noble friend the noble Lord Hampton who is becoming my honourable friend rightly identified the range of challenges over and above subject specialism that it involves and I reflect on my own experience as a teacher for 11 years in a range of schools where I'm afraid my Oxford degree would not have been sufficient on its own to enable me to do right by the children that I was fortunate enough to teach during those 11 years.
We are continuing this flagship teacher training framework. A fact of the previous government, and we will ensure the best available evidence will teach teachers about the critical areas that define great teaching. We have already committed to review of the framework content in 2027 to ensure it continues to provide the best support based on the most up-to-date evidence. It is important for teacher retention, well-being, but a new teachers receive high-quality training and support that allows them to thrive in the fashion.
Clause 46 continues to raise standards and builds on the earlier reforms, and will ensure new teachers and children they teach have the benefit of evidence-based professional training regardless of whether they are in a local authority maintained school, or an academy school. I hope the Committee will agree the clause will stand part of the bill. Turning to the particular point raised in the amendment, amendment 436 a in the name of Baroness Wolf, could I clarify for the noble lady that 16- 19 academies would not be required to meet the requirements in the clause.
The noble Lady made a substantial impact in establishing recognition for the skills and experience teachers of vocational subjects can bring to the classroom and I understand that there are occasions where schools may need to employ experts and specialists who do not have QTS. Schools can lead experts to have particular part of a curriculum and they can lead vocational courses. Extensions are set out in existing regulation. They allow for vocational courses to be led by individuals without Q TS and exemptions include teachers working under supervision.
This does not mean a qualified teacher needs to be physically in the classroom. I think it might be helpful for noble Lords if I sent out further information about the exemptions which I think would alleviate some of the concerns noble Lords raised about some of the good practice that is already happening. We have committed to updating and clarifying regulations so that schools including academies can be confident in using them and we will produce guidance for schools.
Turning to amendments 437 and 437 a in the name of Lord Holmes of Richmond and Lord Agnew of Oulton which would broaden the requirement to be qualified to include other expertise or qualifications. I appreciate the recognition of the value experts from other professions can bring to the classroom. Great teaching relies on expertise that goes beyond subject knowledge. These amendments are unnecessary because of the existing exemption to the requirement for QTS that allows a hunk recruited subject expert as the noble Lord Lucas suggested it to welcome them into school and then to gain QTS through the route.
It ensures they meet the standards and have skills and experience needed to be successful in their role. There are exemptions that allow for instructors with special qualifications or experience to teach part of the curriculum or work under the supervision of a teacher under the supervision of a teacher with QTS. They can gain it while ensuring that all of their children they are teaching achieve. Turning to amendment 438 seeking to provide fast track access to QTS a pathway to parents who are home educators.
To be awarded the status, they must meet teacher standards which set out critical professional skills and experience that schools, parents and children rightly expect from teachers. The noble Lord Hampton identified the real distinction between teaching your own child at home and the skills necessary to teach a larger number of pupils with all of the other responsibilities teaching brings in a school. It would be inappropriate to lower these professional standards through a fast track system for any group in this way.
Turning to amendment 439 and 495 in the name of Lord Storey and Lord Holmes of Richmond. These amendments focus on addressing anti-bullying as part of teacher training and establishing a review of teacher training. I agree with the noble Lord story that every child has the right to feel safe, valued and respected at school. What the noble Lord proposed is important and this is already in hand. Schools are required to have a behaviour policy with measures to prevent bullying.
Schools develop an anti- bullying strategy that suits their setting which includes ensuring staff get the right anti-bullying training. Starting from this month, all ITT courses leading to. QTS Will respond to bullying that threatens physical or emotional safety. The OFSTED expects and framework has long included an evaluation of how schools approach and prevent bullying as well. In particular, I recognise a case made by Baroness Grey-Thompson and Baroness Hayter about a range of areas that must be covered in initial teacher training particularly with emphasis on how to develop the teaching of sport and literacy.
As I have previously outlined, we committed to a review of the content of the initial of the content of the initial teacher training and early career framework in 2027 to ensure high- quality evidence-based training and support for trainee and early career teachers and many teachers identified in this amendment will be part of that consideration. Turning to amendment 436 b and 430 6C that to amendment 436 b and 430 6C that looks at the requirement for QTS in the time to gain it in an exemption for teachers of shortage subjects.
The previous government the noble lady was part of recognised the importance of new teachers getting professional training that they need. This amendment denies new teachers high-quality training and induction precisely when they need it most at the start of their professional careers. Amendment 436 b can lead to unqualified teachers to leaving the profession and those going to another school for the deadline may wait even longer to gain the training and qualifications to which all teachers should be entitled. This risks a negative impact on the quality of teaching and retention of teachers.
We do not want the requirement for Q TS to hold up school recruitment processes and we are updating regulations to clarify schools will be able to recruit unqualified teachers and that these teachers will have three terms to secure a place on an appropriate route to QTS. While I recognise the challenges around teaching recruitment we have inherited, the solution should not be to embed lower standards for shortage subjects into primary legislation. I recognise the challenge made by noble Lords about wouldn't you prefer a properly qualified teacher to an unqualified teacher? I do not accept the defeatism of those that suggest the only way to put good teachers in front of our children is to remove or water down or reduce the professional training that we expect of them.
That is why this government has taken action to ensure we are recruiting and retaining more teachers. It is why we have been willing as one of our first actions to ensure teachers received a 5.5% pay rise from September 2024 and building on this in May 2025 announcing a further 4% pay award. This is an increase in pay for teachers of almost 10% over two years and our investment is starting to deliver. The special secondary school workforce has grown by 2346 full-time equivalents over the last year.
Of course, the best recruitment strategy is retention strategy and we are committed to working with sector partners to reduce workload, improve well-being and enable greater flexible working so teachers not only stay in the profession but thrive and alongside that we have targeted retention incentive, particularly focused on those subjects where it has been difficult to recruit the sort of specialist teachers we want to see in the classroom, maths, physics, chemistry and music teachers in those who work in disadvantaged schools.
Amendment 436 c creates uncertainty for schools and teachers as the teachers they employ could move in and out of the requirement for QTS depending on ITT recruitment data from the most recent years. It would change the requirements of QTS in local authority maintained schools and special schools which are already required to employ teachers with Q TS. I hope for the reasons I outlined supported by the action this government is taking to ensure there are specialist qualified teachers in all of our schools, I ask noble Lords to withdraw their amendments.
19:13
Baroness Wolf of Dulwich (Crossbench)
-
-
Baroness Wolf of Dulwich (Crossbench)
I thank the Minister for clarification for 16-19 academies. I think it would be extremely helpful if she could write to noble Lords and generally cascade out the information about current flexibility and future position of the government because there is a lot of ignorance and uncertainty on this. Given the huge challenges of recruiting people in these areas, these people who are not planning to make a career of teaching, it would be very helpful. I have learned a great deal from the debate which has been helpful because there were those things I did not know about in initial teacher training.
I think it has been very helpful and I beg
**** Possible New Speaker ****
leave to withdraw my amendment. The amendment is by leave
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The amendment is by leave withdrawn. 436b and c, Baroness withdrawn. 436b and c, Baroness Barran? Not moved. 437, Lord Holmes Barran? Not moved. 437, Lord Holmes of Richmond? Not moved. 437a, Lord of Richmond? Not moved. 437a, Lord Agnew of Oulton. Not moved. The question is clause 46 stand part of question is clause 46 stand part of the bill. You don't want to speak again? The question is clause 46 again? The question is clause 46 stand part of the bill.
As many are of that opinion will say, "Content". Of the contrary, "not content". The Of the contrary, "not content". The contents have it. After clause 46, contents have it. After clause 46, amendment 438, Lord Wei. Not moved. amendment 438, Lord Wei. Not moved. 439? Lord Storey. In clause 47,
I think it has been very helpful and I beg
**** Possible New Speaker ****
leave to withdraw my amendment. The amendment is by leave
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The amendment is by leave withdrawn. 436b and c, Baroness withdrawn. 436b and c, Baroness Barran? Not moved. 437, Lord Holmes Barran? Not moved. 437, Lord Holmes of Richmond? Not moved. 437a, Lord of Richmond? Not moved. 437a, Lord Agnew of Oulton. Not moved. The question is clause 46 stand part of question is clause 46 stand part of the bill. You don't want to speak again? The question is clause 46 again? The question is clause 46 stand part of the bill.
As many are of that opinion will say, "Content". Of the contrary, "not content". The Of the contrary, "not content". The contents have it. After clause 46, contents have it. After clause 46, amendment 438, Lord Wei. Not moved. amendment 438, Lord Wei. Not moved. 439? Lord Storey. In clause 47,
19:15
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
439? Lord Storey. In clause 47, amendment 440, Baroness Vere and on behalf of Lord Agnew of Oulton. behalf of Lord Agnew of Oulton.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I am speaking to 440 and 442. He tabled the amendment because of his concerns the new National Curriculum concerns the new National Curriculum remains so uncertain. The interim report has given little indication report has given little indication of what might follow and in the autumn of next year and he believes autumn of next year and he believes with that level of uncertainty the with that level of uncertainty the with that level of uncertainty the Before I sit down, I want to give a warning, we have been here before.
In 2004, the National Curriculum In 2004, the National Curriculum obligation applied to virtually all schools, very few were academies at schools, very few were academies at that time, at that point, inspection was stripped down to remove subject was stripped down to remove subject level scrutiny from most of the curriculum, English and maths in curriculum, English and maths in primary schools were examined but primary schools were examined but beyond that, almost all subject level inspection was removed. What was the consequence? Over time, in primary school, there was a drastic reduction in what was taught, various report showed the wasted years, a report from Ofsted, about key stage III.
But primary schools, especially the ones where science tests were job -- dropped in 2009, but less and less about English and maths. Key stage IV, this was compounded by the equivalence concept brought into performance tables at the same time, all manner of distortions and gaming emerged in a secondary curriculum and DfE had to play whack a mole for years, each time a new game popped up, people will remember the European can shoot -- computer driving licence, equivalent prosecutions that were worth four GCSEs, so on, it would be unfortunate if we went back to that.
What could happen here, because I understand the changes that have been announced are removing the limited subject level scrutiny that was reintroduced in 2019, to counteract this loss of real curriculum. My concern is, the obligation that is included in this clause could come a dead letter, simply because there will not be effective scrutiny to make sure that is what actually happens in practice. Once again, we could be in a situation where only the things that are tested, especially in primary schools, that is quite a limited set, key stage III it is nothing at all, and only them will get taught.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Clause 47, page 111, line 13, at
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Clause 47, page 111, line 13, at end, insert the words as hinted on the Marshalled list.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I am speaking to 440 and 442. He tabled the amendment because of his concerns the new National Curriculum concerns the new National Curriculum remains so uncertain. The interim report has given little indication report has given little indication of what might follow and in the autumn of next year and he believes autumn of next year and he believes with that level of uncertainty the with that level of uncertainty the with that level of uncertainty the Before I sit down, I want to give a warning, we have been here before.
In 2004, the National Curriculum In 2004, the National Curriculum obligation applied to virtually all schools, very few were academies at schools, very few were academies at that time, at that point, inspection was stripped down to remove subject was stripped down to remove subject level scrutiny from most of the curriculum, English and maths in curriculum, English and maths in primary schools were examined but primary schools were examined but beyond that, almost all subject level inspection was removed. What was the consequence? Over time, in primary school, there was a drastic reduction in what was taught, various report showed the wasted years, a report from Ofsted, about key stage III.
But primary schools, especially the ones where science tests were job -- dropped in 2009, but less and less about English and maths. Key stage IV, this was compounded by the equivalence concept brought into performance tables at the same time, all manner of distortions and gaming emerged in a secondary curriculum and DfE had to play whack a mole for years, each time a new game popped up, people will remember the European can shoot -- computer driving licence, equivalent prosecutions that were worth four GCSEs, so on, it would be unfortunate if we went back to that.
What could happen here, because I understand the changes that have been announced are removing the limited subject level scrutiny that was reintroduced in 2019, to counteract this loss of real curriculum. My concern is, the obligation that is included in this clause could come a dead letter, simply because there will not be effective scrutiny to make sure that is what actually happens in practice. Once again, we could be in a situation where only the things that are tested, especially in primary schools, that is quite a limited set, key stage III it is nothing at all, and only them will get taught.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Clause 47, page 111, line 13, at
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Clause 47, page 111, line 13, at end, insert the words as hinted on the Marshalled list.
19:19
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Conservative)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the Marshalled list. I write to support the clause stand apart amendment in the name of stand apart amendment in the name of Baroness Barran, clause 47, as it stands, strips academies as their key freedoms, the ability to tailor your their approaches to meet the needs of the communities. We have evidence that allowing schools this freedom can and does improve outcomes for pupils. This summer, free schools outperformed other non-selective state schools in both GCSE and in the full results, playing an important role in driving up standards, particularly in areas of deprivation.
One of the strengths of free schools has been the diversity, representing a varied range of educational philosophies and high-quality curricula. In a recent report, new schools network set out in above principles that they identified. Those with a strong track record, with outstanding ratings, strong exam results and high levels of participation, engagement, progression and achievement. Among them was a relentless focus on the fundamentals of learning, which often drew on international and well evidenced school and curriculum models and school and curriculum models and practice.
Drawing on the best evidence, and approving ideas of what works, the schools have used the flexibility in the current system to adapt the curriculum to suit the students and, after all, they know their pupils left. The report set out a number of examples where free schools have used the freedoms to defend their pupils. One academy in Plymouth developed a curriculum around marine themes, school 21 is project orientated with practices allowing pupils to choose personalised opportunities for growth. And, for children with special needs, the lighthouse school in needs has supported a growing network of similar institutions.
It has shared its unique curriculum with more than 50 other school leaders and devastated how the innovative approach has allowed it to design provision aimed at pupils with autism. Allowing this flexibility does not and should not mean a free for all, that is not the case. Whilst academies are not required to follow the National Curriculum, they are required by funding requirements to supply a broad and balanced curriculum. Again, the government is proposing changes to direct the autonomy of academies when it is not clear what the problem is that this clause is trying to solve.
As we have heard, the National Curriculum itself is under review, which is creating more uncertainty. As a result of provisions in this Bill, academies will be forced to sign up to a new curriculum, the content of which the government has not decided yet, without knowing if they will be suitable flexibility is for them to appropriately tailor their curriculum to the needs and context of their communities, as we heard from the noble Lord, he has explained the breadth of powers included in the Bill that would allow the Secretary of State in the future to be more prescriptive and expensive in relation to the detail of any new National Curriculum, if they were so inclined.
A further reduction in academy autonomy. I do not believe this is the right approach, our education system as a whole has benefited from the ability of teachers to be creative, innovative, adapt the curriculum and respond to the unique needs of their pupils. Unfortunately, because 47,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
as it stands, is a retrograde step. Can I just... As somebody who has
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Can I just... As somebody who has not put down an amendment, can I
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Conservative)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the Marshalled list. I write to support the clause stand apart amendment in the name of stand apart amendment in the name of Baroness Barran, clause 47, as it stands, strips academies as their key freedoms, the ability to tailor your their approaches to meet the needs of the communities. We have evidence that allowing schools this freedom can and does improve outcomes for pupils. This summer, free schools outperformed other non-selective state schools in both GCSE and in the full results, playing an important role in driving up standards, particularly in areas of deprivation.
One of the strengths of free schools has been the diversity, representing a varied range of educational philosophies and high-quality curricula. In a recent report, new schools network set out in above principles that they identified. Those with a strong track record, with outstanding ratings, strong exam results and high levels of participation, engagement, progression and achievement. Among them was a relentless focus on the fundamentals of learning, which often drew on international and well evidenced school and curriculum models and school and curriculum models and practice.
Drawing on the best evidence, and approving ideas of what works, the schools have used the flexibility in the current system to adapt the curriculum to suit the students and, after all, they know their pupils left. The report set out a number of examples where free schools have used the freedoms to defend their pupils. One academy in Plymouth developed a curriculum around marine themes, school 21 is project orientated with practices allowing pupils to choose personalised opportunities for growth. And, for children with special needs, the lighthouse school in needs has supported a growing network of similar institutions.
It has shared its unique curriculum with more than 50 other school leaders and devastated how the innovative approach has allowed it to design provision aimed at pupils with autism. Allowing this flexibility does not and should not mean a free for all, that is not the case. Whilst academies are not required to follow the National Curriculum, they are required by funding requirements to supply a broad and balanced curriculum. Again, the government is proposing changes to direct the autonomy of academies when it is not clear what the problem is that this clause is trying to solve.
As we have heard, the National Curriculum itself is under review, which is creating more uncertainty. As a result of provisions in this Bill, academies will be forced to sign up to a new curriculum, the content of which the government has not decided yet, without knowing if they will be suitable flexibility is for them to appropriately tailor their curriculum to the needs and context of their communities, as we heard from the noble Lord, he has explained the breadth of powers included in the Bill that would allow the Secretary of State in the future to be more prescriptive and expensive in relation to the detail of any new National Curriculum, if they were so inclined.
A further reduction in academy autonomy. I do not believe this is the right approach, our education system as a whole has benefited from the ability of teachers to be creative, innovative, adapt the curriculum and respond to the unique needs of their pupils. Unfortunately, because 47,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
as it stands, is a retrograde step. Can I just... As somebody who has
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Can I just... As somebody who has not put down an amendment, can I
19:23
Lord Sewell of Sanderstead (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Sewell of Sanderstead (Conservative)
not put down an amendment, can I give some collective memory context to what we are debating today, I think one of the things I would like to add to this is... And I want to support most of the amendments coming through, hopefully they will not be rejected but we will see what happens. Yesterday I listened to the speech made by the education Secretary, she rightly boasted about the legacy of Ernest Perry and how he understood that the real social mobility is about working class people and the agency to aspire.
Sadly, as she reeled off the achievements of the Labour movement, she forgot one of the most radical and important achievements, I think, from Labour, that was the setting up of academies, yes, a Labour invention, it may have been this philosophy that inspired Tony Blair, in 2002, to set up the Hackney learning trust, this became the birthplace of the Academy movement. I was lucky enough to be part of that board that was tasked to transform Hackney education. Some would say our task was impossible and we were faced with a Labour education authority that totally failed all of its students and parents.
And Hackney was given the label, not only the worst education district in Britain, but the worst in Europe. In those days, boys from African Caribbean backgrounds, were at the bottom of the heap and I remember in the early days, there was joy from the education authority, the current one, in handing us the power, yes, there was grumblings about what they knew about the new model of academies, but there was a sense that this was the answer. Our first task was to find an iconic school which was regarded as the worst performing and transform that.
We set about closing the Hackney Downs School and we built a fantastic Academy. We were given a 10 year contract and within two years, Hackney was on its way to moving from the worst place to educate your child to been the best. For African Caribbean boys, the results zoomed, taking them above the national average. How did we do this? Well, a number of factors, for me, I think it is in danger in terms of this school bill. Great school leaders, that was a key element in there.
The second was a massive high academic expectation of the student. Rigorous school improvement methods, no school was allowed to fail Ofsted. We were creating schools of excellence, to go toe to toe with the best of our private schools. And for many of the ethnic minority students, the context of a traditional, well disciplined school with high expectations and, of course, no evidence in terms of identity politics, that made no difference at all, it was the key, traditional, well disciplined school with great leadership that made the difference.
For me, the big difference, we gave the schools the autonomy, in terms of the curriculum. The discipline, the hiring of staff and the allocation of funding, these were key elements that drove the success. I think that one of things about bringing us up into the highest levels of education outcomes was that particular drive. Now, one particular concerning element in the proposed to remove academisation for underperforming schools and replacing it with something else, I think, is problematic and, for me, my concern would be that we will be going backwards.
In terms of those dark days when schools, particularly in London, where at a place where they were going backwards. I want to share with you a quote from a Leader of city London academies trust, he probably wants... If he was here, he would put this as a plea. He says, was fortunate to be granted the privilege of finding a government funded state school in Newham, the second most deprived borough in London, thanks to the freedoms afforded to me by the academies program, that school and performed many independent and grammar schools.
He regularly sends pupils to Oxbridge and Ivy League universities, on a full scholarship worth £250,000 each. Across this country, others have used the opportunities of academisation to become$$JOIN... Giving the students in their communities hope going forward. And ranking us as one of the best in education outcomes. I think, for me, one of the issues... If we return to what he would have loved, he would have probably liked the Academy movement. And would turn in his grave at some of the attempts to disrupt what is working for students from poor backgrounds and ethnic minorities.
I think that, for me, the centre of this, to see that academies have not worked for... I think this is the heart of what the changes are, it is not working for the majority population, perhaps, not working for special needs students, I think this misses a point, we need to be creative in spreading a model that can work for all pupils, not dismantling and tinkering with a great asset for social mobility. That is the key element in this.
I will end with a quote from Ernest Bevan himself. He says, I did not land on hard rocks, I was launched from them. That is the spirit of academies, it is an enabling agency of schools and pupils to do their best and realise the best that they have. In London, we have, in a sense, created a great asset which was birthed by Labour, over there, we carried it on and what we want to do really is make sure that we ensure that we have something we can be proud of.
Think again, when we look at the curriculum, to see whether we can find a way that we can ensure that those students continue to do the best. We have schools in London that can reach better results than Eaton can reach better results than Eaton can. There are people here who have taught 20 years, 30 years ago, they would not have dreamt of that at all and now have a situation where we can. That has come about through the way in which we have used academies and use that process.
I urge the government not to tinker with your
Sadly, as she reeled off the achievements of the Labour movement, she forgot one of the most radical and important achievements, I think, from Labour, that was the setting up of academies, yes, a Labour invention, it may have been this philosophy that inspired Tony Blair, in 2002, to set up the Hackney learning trust, this became the birthplace of the Academy movement. I was lucky enough to be part of that board that was tasked to transform Hackney education. Some would say our task was impossible and we were faced with a Labour education authority that totally failed all of its students and parents.
And Hackney was given the label, not only the worst education district in Britain, but the worst in Europe. In those days, boys from African Caribbean backgrounds, were at the bottom of the heap and I remember in the early days, there was joy from the education authority, the current one, in handing us the power, yes, there was grumblings about what they knew about the new model of academies, but there was a sense that this was the answer. Our first task was to find an iconic school which was regarded as the worst performing and transform that.
We set about closing the Hackney Downs School and we built a fantastic Academy. We were given a 10 year contract and within two years, Hackney was on its way to moving from the worst place to educate your child to been the best. For African Caribbean boys, the results zoomed, taking them above the national average. How did we do this? Well, a number of factors, for me, I think it is in danger in terms of this school bill. Great school leaders, that was a key element in there.
The second was a massive high academic expectation of the student. Rigorous school improvement methods, no school was allowed to fail Ofsted. We were creating schools of excellence, to go toe to toe with the best of our private schools. And for many of the ethnic minority students, the context of a traditional, well disciplined school with high expectations and, of course, no evidence in terms of identity politics, that made no difference at all, it was the key, traditional, well disciplined school with great leadership that made the difference.
For me, the big difference, we gave the schools the autonomy, in terms of the curriculum. The discipline, the hiring of staff and the allocation of funding, these were key elements that drove the success. I think that one of things about bringing us up into the highest levels of education outcomes was that particular drive. Now, one particular concerning element in the proposed to remove academisation for underperforming schools and replacing it with something else, I think, is problematic and, for me, my concern would be that we will be going backwards.
In terms of those dark days when schools, particularly in London, where at a place where they were going backwards. I want to share with you a quote from a Leader of city London academies trust, he probably wants... If he was here, he would put this as a plea. He says, was fortunate to be granted the privilege of finding a government funded state school in Newham, the second most deprived borough in London, thanks to the freedoms afforded to me by the academies program, that school and performed many independent and grammar schools.
He regularly sends pupils to Oxbridge and Ivy League universities, on a full scholarship worth £250,000 each. Across this country, others have used the opportunities of academisation to become$$JOIN... Giving the students in their communities hope going forward. And ranking us as one of the best in education outcomes. I think, for me, one of the issues... If we return to what he would have loved, he would have probably liked the Academy movement. And would turn in his grave at some of the attempts to disrupt what is working for students from poor backgrounds and ethnic minorities.
I think that, for me, the centre of this, to see that academies have not worked for... I think this is the heart of what the changes are, it is not working for the majority population, perhaps, not working for special needs students, I think this misses a point, we need to be creative in spreading a model that can work for all pupils, not dismantling and tinkering with a great asset for social mobility. That is the key element in this.
I will end with a quote from Ernest Bevan himself. He says, I did not land on hard rocks, I was launched from them. That is the spirit of academies, it is an enabling agency of schools and pupils to do their best and realise the best that they have. In London, we have, in a sense, created a great asset which was birthed by Labour, over there, we carried it on and what we want to do really is make sure that we ensure that we have something we can be proud of.
Think again, when we look at the curriculum, to see whether we can find a way that we can ensure that those students continue to do the best. We have schools in London that can reach better results than Eaton can reach better results than Eaton can. There are people here who have taught 20 years, 30 years ago, they would not have dreamt of that at all and now have a situation where we can. That has come about through the way in which we have used academies and use that process.
I urge the government not to tinker with your
19:30
Lord Hampton (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Hampton (Crossbench)
Atmos porn, I have one child there and one left recently., I am slightly emotional and I cannot thank him and enough. I cannot add anything more to that except to quote a chair the multi-academy trust as I was speaking to where they said education was one of the few things that works. Why do they want to dismantle it? I think I can want to dismantle it? I think I can
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I must make my apologies. I was not able to speak at second reading because I missed the start of the session for family reasons so I hope you will be bearing with me while I make a contribution linked to the make a contribution linked to the group and amendment 497. In the name of Lord Holmes who is not in his place and I thank him for fronting
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I must make my apologies. I was not able to speak at second reading because I missed the start of the session for family reasons so I hope you will be bearing with me while I make a contribution linked to the make a contribution linked to the group and amendment 497. In the name of Lord Holmes who is not in his place and I thank him for fronting
19:32
Baroness Caine of Kentish Town (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Caine of Kentish Town (Labour)
the issue of artificial intelligence and I declare my interest as the Camden steam project. Camden learn in trailblazing pilot, the London AI campus, developed in collaboration with Google enabling to inspire, inform and educate children and teachers in AI and digital skills. If you aren't interested in a visit to the centre, get in touch with me. The Department for Education articulate its purpose as the department opportunity waking the link between background and success. The National Curriculum review nearing its conclusion is vital to that mission for many reasons, including as one of its terms of reference states developing a cutting-edge curriculum and equipping children and young people with essential knowledge and skills that enable them to adapt and thrive in the world of work and the workplace of the future.
I hope the contributions will be helpful to the chair as she focuses on this area in the second stage of her work. She is rightly talking about the review pragmatically following a path of evolution, not revolution, recognising what has been working successfully such is the advances the previous government made in reading and maths. However, while I support the approach, we are in revolution in the world of work, brought on by rapid advances in technology with the attendant need to effectively support growth in productivity particularly in the key sector of industrial strategy and our regions.
As well as the central issue of AI which the noble Lord has spoken about and focused on, employers and respective research bodies identify creativity as critical to our future. As raised in the House before, there is remedial work in investment needed to address the consequences of previous policy decisions that led to cultural learning alliances 2025 scorecard showing art century in GCSE falling by 48% since 2010. With design technology seeing over 70% drop leading to an arts entitlement gap highlighted by the disparity between attainment in state funded schools and independent ones.
It is welcome that the importance of addressing these issues has been recognised and that the Prime Minister spoke about the need to put creativity back in the heart of the curriculum. However, the remediation to be effective and up-to-date needs to do a number of things, the existing suite of qualifications need to be modernised to take into account the impact of technology and AI and the attendant resource that that will require in order to deliver the Prime Minister's ambition including capital investment, teacher recruitment and training, online learning, supporting access to talented children to send to specialist excellence and so on.
Critically, there is the need to address the need for the new, new qualifications and courses to deliver what is necessary for the future of work. One of our USP is as a country is our talent in combining creativity and digital innovation, driving change across a number of industries creating new businesses and roles and jobs. UKIE IV trade body for computer games on the back of their digital schools project and support of the creative industries council put forward a case for the development of a digital creativity GCSE as an alternative to the current computer science qualification.
The inconsistent digital skills teaching in schools since the introduction of the computing curriculum has led to a postcode lottery in digital education. These approaches offer young people other pathways to high reward skills and jobs and we await to hear if it will be supportive as part of the review. A lot to think about and we have a need to move forward launching the national curriculum. I would be interested to hear my friends views on whether the amendment suggested and process of evolution and review might be needed for the curriculum so that it continues to develop with the revolution unfolding before us.
revolution unfolding before us.
I hope the contributions will be helpful to the chair as she focuses on this area in the second stage of her work. She is rightly talking about the review pragmatically following a path of evolution, not revolution, recognising what has been working successfully such is the advances the previous government made in reading and maths. However, while I support the approach, we are in revolution in the world of work, brought on by rapid advances in technology with the attendant need to effectively support growth in productivity particularly in the key sector of industrial strategy and our regions.
As well as the central issue of AI which the noble Lord has spoken about and focused on, employers and respective research bodies identify creativity as critical to our future. As raised in the House before, there is remedial work in investment needed to address the consequences of previous policy decisions that led to cultural learning alliances 2025 scorecard showing art century in GCSE falling by 48% since 2010. With design technology seeing over 70% drop leading to an arts entitlement gap highlighted by the disparity between attainment in state funded schools and independent ones.
It is welcome that the importance of addressing these issues has been recognised and that the Prime Minister spoke about the need to put creativity back in the heart of the curriculum. However, the remediation to be effective and up-to-date needs to do a number of things, the existing suite of qualifications need to be modernised to take into account the impact of technology and AI and the attendant resource that that will require in order to deliver the Prime Minister's ambition including capital investment, teacher recruitment and training, online learning, supporting access to talented children to send to specialist excellence and so on.
Critically, there is the need to address the need for the new, new qualifications and courses to deliver what is necessary for the future of work. One of our USP is as a country is our talent in combining creativity and digital innovation, driving change across a number of industries creating new businesses and roles and jobs. UKIE IV trade body for computer games on the back of their digital schools project and support of the creative industries council put forward a case for the development of a digital creativity GCSE as an alternative to the current computer science qualification.
The inconsistent digital skills teaching in schools since the introduction of the computing curriculum has led to a postcode lottery in digital education. These approaches offer young people other pathways to high reward skills and jobs and we await to hear if it will be supportive as part of the review. A lot to think about and we have a need to move forward launching the national curriculum. I would be interested to hear my friends views on whether the amendment suggested and process of evolution and review might be needed for the curriculum so that it continues to develop with the revolution unfolding before us.
revolution unfolding before us.
19:37
Baroness Sater (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Sater (Conservative)
I rise to move amendment 502d in my name and I thank Lord Farmer for his support. This looks at the mandatory part of the primary school curriculum from year one. Why do we need it? It aims simply and importantly to ensure children develop knowledge and skills needed to understand to manage money from an early age. In a world of existing an early age. In a world of existing financial complexity where our children encounter targeted advertising, digital payments and online scams often fought they have even reached secondary school is more important than ever that financial literacy should not be left to chance.
Why financial education is statutory part of the secondary school curriculum in England is not a requirement in primary schools and create a gap at the stage children begin to form lifelong money habits and look at the start contrast to the rest of the United Kingdom where education is embedded in the National Curriculum at an early age in England. The early pension service found these habits developed as early as age 7 yet we wait until secondary school to introduce compulsory learning. With that from year one, we risk missing the most informative opportunity to equip our children with the schools they need to manage money with confidence and make good financial decisions throughout their lives.
According to research from Santander UK at the beginning of the year, 2000 pupils, 18-21-year-olds, only 26% of young adults report receiving any kind of financial education at school without a fundamental understanding of money management. As a result our young people are increasingly turning to online sources, especially social media, which comes with its own risk for financial guidance and information as they step into an age of financial independence which cannot be right. Redstart educate a charity for primary school children delivers financial education through regressive learning and have emerged with money ready, a long standing campaign for financial education being statutory in primary education in England.
They tell us levels of financial literacy in the UK are falling and highlights how awareness of debt and investment need to begin in primary schools. It is hard to believe that the data shows from their programs in primary schools, 90% of children say they understand budgeting and understand how it can help them achieve goals and 80% of children explain the difference between lending and giving. This is surely sufficiently compelling for financial literacy to be taught in primary schools.
It will assist in dealing with sufficient inequalities that exist across the country. However, as the Social Market Foundation highlights for financial education to make a difference it is important to start young. The socio-economics inequalities in financial understanding can be seen at age 11. According to Young Enterprise who called for financial education to be a core subject in primary school, only one in three primary age children receive any financial education at all and where this is taught the provision is patchy.
A postcode lottery. This amendment is about establishing consistency and equity, recognising financial education should not depend on where a child lives or which school they attend. The thinktank centre for social justice called on the government as a minimum to place financial education on the National Curriculum for primary schools within PHSE and the APPG financial education for young people is recommended to be embedded in the primary school curriculum. We also cannot ignore the link between financial literacy and mental well- being and according to the mental health foundation, money worries are the single biggest cause of stress and anxiety in the UK.
The earlier we can equip children to understand and manage money, the better their long-term resilience and emotional health will be. I acknowledge the National Curriculum is under considerable pressure but financial education cannot be seen as an optional extra. It is a vital life skill. Essential for preparing our children to live fulfilling, stable lives in increasing complex financial world. This is why I believe this amendment would be a valuable addition to the bill.
Why financial education is statutory part of the secondary school curriculum in England is not a requirement in primary schools and create a gap at the stage children begin to form lifelong money habits and look at the start contrast to the rest of the United Kingdom where education is embedded in the National Curriculum at an early age in England. The early pension service found these habits developed as early as age 7 yet we wait until secondary school to introduce compulsory learning. With that from year one, we risk missing the most informative opportunity to equip our children with the schools they need to manage money with confidence and make good financial decisions throughout their lives.
According to research from Santander UK at the beginning of the year, 2000 pupils, 18-21-year-olds, only 26% of young adults report receiving any kind of financial education at school without a fundamental understanding of money management. As a result our young people are increasingly turning to online sources, especially social media, which comes with its own risk for financial guidance and information as they step into an age of financial independence which cannot be right. Redstart educate a charity for primary school children delivers financial education through regressive learning and have emerged with money ready, a long standing campaign for financial education being statutory in primary education in England.
They tell us levels of financial literacy in the UK are falling and highlights how awareness of debt and investment need to begin in primary schools. It is hard to believe that the data shows from their programs in primary schools, 90% of children say they understand budgeting and understand how it can help them achieve goals and 80% of children explain the difference between lending and giving. This is surely sufficiently compelling for financial literacy to be taught in primary schools.
It will assist in dealing with sufficient inequalities that exist across the country. However, as the Social Market Foundation highlights for financial education to make a difference it is important to start young. The socio-economics inequalities in financial understanding can be seen at age 11. According to Young Enterprise who called for financial education to be a core subject in primary school, only one in three primary age children receive any financial education at all and where this is taught the provision is patchy.
A postcode lottery. This amendment is about establishing consistency and equity, recognising financial education should not depend on where a child lives or which school they attend. The thinktank centre for social justice called on the government as a minimum to place financial education on the National Curriculum for primary schools within PHSE and the APPG financial education for young people is recommended to be embedded in the primary school curriculum. We also cannot ignore the link between financial literacy and mental well- being and according to the mental health foundation, money worries are the single biggest cause of stress and anxiety in the UK.
The earlier we can equip children to understand and manage money, the better their long-term resilience and emotional health will be. I acknowledge the National Curriculum is under considerable pressure but financial education cannot be seen as an optional extra. It is a vital life skill. Essential for preparing our children to live fulfilling, stable lives in increasing complex financial world. This is why I believe this amendment would be a valuable addition to the bill.
19:42
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
I draw the attention of the House to the amendment in my name, 441. It is not the most elegant amendment I have moved, but it was designed to try and get out of the thinking around supporting those with special educational needs through the use of assistive technology. I do carry a couple of obvious interests, and the one I should declare is the fact I'm a chair of Micro-lender PI or -- micro-Link plc which deals with adaptive technology in education and I also a show off bad dyslexic who cannot function or deliver a letter without using it.
What I'm trying to get across is if we take English and somebody dyslexic, if you are bad enough, you will not achieve in English unless you use assistive technology without having someone dictating to you. The modern processes you will go through to learn a language because your language processing part of the brain, the short-term memory, do not work that way and you will fail at. You may choose to fail dramatically or simply fail, but you will not achieve.
Using assistive technology means you can access that part of the curriculum, get through and possibly go to work and not have someone else there. You have your independence. I tried to get the attitude that is a great way of addressing the problems of factional education needs, get in early and that is how we adapt. It is something that if we didn't know about it in this part of the bill, it would help us in the future. I hope the government is friendly and there are all sort of things attached to this.
The great thing about mobile phones, they are a good platform to carry the technology on. It might not be the only waif forward, there might be others stopped getting an idea of thinking on this will probably help the forthcoming debates. It may not be a silver bullet, but it is something that will help and it will be good to hear what the government attitude is.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I am grateful to the noble Baroness for supporting. My Baroness for supporting. My amendment provides the order or
What I'm trying to get across is if we take English and somebody dyslexic, if you are bad enough, you will not achieve in English unless you use assistive technology without having someone dictating to you. The modern processes you will go through to learn a language because your language processing part of the brain, the short-term memory, do not work that way and you will fail at. You may choose to fail dramatically or simply fail, but you will not achieve.
Using assistive technology means you can access that part of the curriculum, get through and possibly go to work and not have someone else there. You have your independence. I tried to get the attitude that is a great way of addressing the problems of factional education needs, get in early and that is how we adapt. It is something that if we didn't know about it in this part of the bill, it would help us in the future. I hope the government is friendly and there are all sort of things attached to this.
The great thing about mobile phones, they are a good platform to carry the technology on. It might not be the only waif forward, there might be others stopped getting an idea of thinking on this will probably help the forthcoming debates. It may not be a silver bullet, but it is something that will help and it will be good to hear what the government attitude is.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I am grateful to the noble Baroness for supporting. My Baroness for supporting. My amendment provides the order or
19:45
Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench)
amendment provides the order or regulation made by virtue of any provision of the bill that immense primary legislation shall not apply to an academy school. Academies proven success is based on their freedom to depart from the National Curriculum and to apply curriculum tailored to their pupils needs. The bill is making a far-reaching change to the way academies work because the government would in future be able to control the contents and application of the National Curriculum to academies. As I pointed out at second reading this would not be done by primary legislation as one would expect, but by secondary legislation and by secondary legislation and These raise questions as regard compliance with the rule of law.
To understand where the powers lie, it is necessary to follow a rather obscure legislative trail, which makes them all the more objectionable. The trail begins with clause 47 which insert new schedule one into the Academies Act which mandates the application to academies of the National Curriculum provisions in the education act 2002. However, in doing so, pulls 47 applies to academies, all of the regulation powers enjoyed by the Secretary of state under that act. Those powers enable the Secretary of state to amend the act and are therefore Henry the powers which will also apply to academies.
For those patting the gory details, sections 82, 84, 86, 87 and 91 of the 2002 act, combined with section 210 of that act and clause 63 of our bill. It took me a while to work that out. They are very substantial powers, the Secretary of State can, by such orders, and further requirements to that curriculum, or amend the course teaches -- for key stages, including attainment targets. By virtue of clause 47, all such changes made by Henry VIII powers will now be applied to academies by the back door.
Moreover, section 91 of the 2002 act allows regulations to modify the National Curriculum in anyway specified in the regulations. This will also apply to academies and is subject to the negative resolution procedure. The Defence Select Committee on delegated powers suggested, on 6 March 2002, that the House might wish to probe uses of this clause further with the Minister. In addition, we must not forget clause 47 of this Bill which enables any such order made under the education act to amend the new schedule to the Academies Act.
Which sets out which provisions of the National Curriculum are to apply to academies. This is yet another Henry VIII power, this clause, clause 47, is riddled with Henry VIII powers which are totally concealed. As I asked, at second reading, whatever the thinking was in 2002, for maintained schools, is it really appropriate for these draconian powers to be used now by an obscure side wind to change the groundbreaking new regime proposed for academies. Lord Judd said this, you can be sure, he said, that when these clauses are introduced, they will always be said to be necessary.
William Pik wonders how to treat such a plea with disdain, necessity is the justification for every infringement of human rights.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Lord Soley, I thought, gave an inspiring scene setter for the next groups of amendments that we are discussing. I think it was a taste of why the decisions that we make in
To understand where the powers lie, it is necessary to follow a rather obscure legislative trail, which makes them all the more objectionable. The trail begins with clause 47 which insert new schedule one into the Academies Act which mandates the application to academies of the National Curriculum provisions in the education act 2002. However, in doing so, pulls 47 applies to academies, all of the regulation powers enjoyed by the Secretary of state under that act. Those powers enable the Secretary of state to amend the act and are therefore Henry the powers which will also apply to academies.
For those patting the gory details, sections 82, 84, 86, 87 and 91 of the 2002 act, combined with section 210 of that act and clause 63 of our bill. It took me a while to work that out. They are very substantial powers, the Secretary of State can, by such orders, and further requirements to that curriculum, or amend the course teaches -- for key stages, including attainment targets. By virtue of clause 47, all such changes made by Henry VIII powers will now be applied to academies by the back door.
Moreover, section 91 of the 2002 act allows regulations to modify the National Curriculum in anyway specified in the regulations. This will also apply to academies and is subject to the negative resolution procedure. The Defence Select Committee on delegated powers suggested, on 6 March 2002, that the House might wish to probe uses of this clause further with the Minister. In addition, we must not forget clause 47 of this Bill which enables any such order made under the education act to amend the new schedule to the Academies Act.
Which sets out which provisions of the National Curriculum are to apply to academies. This is yet another Henry VIII power, this clause, clause 47, is riddled with Henry VIII powers which are totally concealed. As I asked, at second reading, whatever the thinking was in 2002, for maintained schools, is it really appropriate for these draconian powers to be used now by an obscure side wind to change the groundbreaking new regime proposed for academies. Lord Judd said this, you can be sure, he said, that when these clauses are introduced, they will always be said to be necessary.
William Pik wonders how to treat such a plea with disdain, necessity is the justification for every infringement of human rights.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Lord Soley, I thought, gave an inspiring scene setter for the next groups of amendments that we are discussing. I think it was a taste of why the decisions that we make in
19:49
Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-affiliated)
-
-
Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-affiliated)
of why the decisions that we make in this Bill matter to so many pupils and young people, it is why I urge the government not to throw the baby out with the bathwater and, in many instances, think again. In this group, I am standing to move my amendment, it simply says, before the Bill is passed or enacted, the government's own curriculum review needs to be published and consulted on. This legislation before us requires that all schools follow... All schools follow the National Curriculum.
Yet, there is no agreed National Curriculum. Instead, the government wants to review the curriculum, which is fair enough, but that review will not be published before we are asked to vote blind. It is simply wrong for a Bill to force schools to follow a particular curriculum when we have not been told what is in it. More broadly, we have spent a long time on this Bill, outside affair, the Bill is informally known as the Schools Bill. But we have not discussed the whole reason for schools, to educate children into the world of knowledge, until this point, and educating children requires on us agreeing what the content of that education can sisters -- consists of.
The curriculum should not be an afterthought. It is a vehicle used pass on the knowledge of humanity. It is our greatest tool for social mobility. It is not a fixed body of knowledge, it changes over time, it is often contested, it can be challenged, but it is a key component of educating the young. The argument epitomised by this group asks whether every school needs to follow the same curriculum that every school must follow. Yet, we do not know what curriculum we are talking about, despite how important it is, and the government recognises that, just taking three amendments that we have got here, gives us some sort of meat on what the argument might be.
One cause for financial education in primary schools, we have already heard, motorboat it. More to come, in terms of education for growing food and food preparation and on education for voting. You might see that those amendments are hobbyhorse amendments, I am not saying that in an insulting way, they suggest the interests of the people putting them forward. They could be creative and forward. They could be creative and positive in a particular hand with certain groups of people.
And if you get any group of teachers together at any time, any group of parents or adults, or pupils, and say, what should go in the curriculum? There are always very creative discussions about priorities, what should matter, and so on. The point I'm making is, the curriculum, at the best of times, is something of dispute, it can be liberating, transformative and inspiring, but it can be overly ideological, propagandist, politicised, used as a device for social engineering, as I said at second reading, I worry when Professor Frist says her review will look at what is taught through a social justice lens with an emphasis on inclusivity, I'm afraid, I think of some of the more divisive aspects of identity politics, some of the arguments that have been had over critical race theory in schools, decolonisation and so on, it fills me with dread.
This government has had to pick up the pieces of curriculum missteps in relation to RSHE, as parents across the UK have become shocked to discover their children were covering highly sexualised and age inappropriate content. Some schools were affirming children in their fur -- chosen gender identities. I commend the government for tackling that. And taking it on. The point I'm making is, all of that was inspired by centralised curriculum diktats. I think we have to consider what the centralised curriculum diktats for all schools will be after the curriculum review.
Professor Francis is apparently said that there are a few will look at the alleged problem of... The curriculum is, sorry... The alleged problem that the curriculum is too heavy. We are being asked to vote on legislation in a curriculum... With the curriculum absent, despite a significant mandate that all schools must follow this curriculum. Finally, we are told the curriculum review will address barriers to attainment, but so far, the hints we have been given into the review look to be blaming exams, and a curriculum that is overly academic for creating too much stress and anxiety for pupils, something I disagree with.
This hence, perhaps, of a new assessment regime that will be less stressful and, I'm afraid, I think that does fuel some genuine concerns amongst educators that the curriculum review might amount to a recipe for lower academic standards, as we have seen in Scotland and Wales, they have completely appended their curriculum in recent years, attainment has plummeted, something -- sometimes below the OECD average. I have not yet decided whether the Bill's clause 47 should be dropped, although I thought the noble Lady, Baroness Evans, made a good case, that definitely made me consider that to be worth considering.
I am actually sold on the idea of a common entitlement for all children and am not opposed to a National Curriculum for all but I do think the government should not be rigid and there should be more flexibility and the noble Lord, Lord Storey ,$$JOIN 's amendment, allows for that. However, none of this is the point of my amendment, this Bill says all schools follow National Curriculum will not tell us what is in it before we are being asked to rubberstamp it.
It reminds me of an FD student that I taught in further education, a bit of a cheeky chap, he missed a deadline for his GCSE and he actually said, out loud, in the class, can't you just passed me, Miss, I will show you the essay when I have written it later, I thought that is a bit of a cheek, and the same is being displayed by the government. I would urge the government to get their essay in on time or at least allow us not to devote until we have seen it.
Yet, there is no agreed National Curriculum. Instead, the government wants to review the curriculum, which is fair enough, but that review will not be published before we are asked to vote blind. It is simply wrong for a Bill to force schools to follow a particular curriculum when we have not been told what is in it. More broadly, we have spent a long time on this Bill, outside affair, the Bill is informally known as the Schools Bill. But we have not discussed the whole reason for schools, to educate children into the world of knowledge, until this point, and educating children requires on us agreeing what the content of that education can sisters -- consists of.
The curriculum should not be an afterthought. It is a vehicle used pass on the knowledge of humanity. It is our greatest tool for social mobility. It is not a fixed body of knowledge, it changes over time, it is often contested, it can be challenged, but it is a key component of educating the young. The argument epitomised by this group asks whether every school needs to follow the same curriculum that every school must follow. Yet, we do not know what curriculum we are talking about, despite how important it is, and the government recognises that, just taking three amendments that we have got here, gives us some sort of meat on what the argument might be.
One cause for financial education in primary schools, we have already heard, motorboat it. More to come, in terms of education for growing food and food preparation and on education for voting. You might see that those amendments are hobbyhorse amendments, I am not saying that in an insulting way, they suggest the interests of the people putting them forward. They could be creative and forward. They could be creative and positive in a particular hand with certain groups of people.
And if you get any group of teachers together at any time, any group of parents or adults, or pupils, and say, what should go in the curriculum? There are always very creative discussions about priorities, what should matter, and so on. The point I'm making is, the curriculum, at the best of times, is something of dispute, it can be liberating, transformative and inspiring, but it can be overly ideological, propagandist, politicised, used as a device for social engineering, as I said at second reading, I worry when Professor Frist says her review will look at what is taught through a social justice lens with an emphasis on inclusivity, I'm afraid, I think of some of the more divisive aspects of identity politics, some of the arguments that have been had over critical race theory in schools, decolonisation and so on, it fills me with dread.
This government has had to pick up the pieces of curriculum missteps in relation to RSHE, as parents across the UK have become shocked to discover their children were covering highly sexualised and age inappropriate content. Some schools were affirming children in their fur -- chosen gender identities. I commend the government for tackling that. And taking it on. The point I'm making is, all of that was inspired by centralised curriculum diktats. I think we have to consider what the centralised curriculum diktats for all schools will be after the curriculum review.
Professor Francis is apparently said that there are a few will look at the alleged problem of... The curriculum is, sorry... The alleged problem that the curriculum is too heavy. We are being asked to vote on legislation in a curriculum... With the curriculum absent, despite a significant mandate that all schools must follow this curriculum. Finally, we are told the curriculum review will address barriers to attainment, but so far, the hints we have been given into the review look to be blaming exams, and a curriculum that is overly academic for creating too much stress and anxiety for pupils, something I disagree with.
This hence, perhaps, of a new assessment regime that will be less stressful and, I'm afraid, I think that does fuel some genuine concerns amongst educators that the curriculum review might amount to a recipe for lower academic standards, as we have seen in Scotland and Wales, they have completely appended their curriculum in recent years, attainment has plummeted, something -- sometimes below the OECD average. I have not yet decided whether the Bill's clause 47 should be dropped, although I thought the noble Lady, Baroness Evans, made a good case, that definitely made me consider that to be worth considering.
I am actually sold on the idea of a common entitlement for all children and am not opposed to a National Curriculum for all but I do think the government should not be rigid and there should be more flexibility and the noble Lord, Lord Storey ,$$JOIN 's amendment, allows for that. However, none of this is the point of my amendment, this Bill says all schools follow National Curriculum will not tell us what is in it before we are being asked to rubberstamp it.
It reminds me of an FD student that I taught in further education, a bit of a cheeky chap, he missed a deadline for his GCSE and he actually said, out loud, in the class, can't you just passed me, Miss, I will show you the essay when I have written it later, I thought that is a bit of a cheek, and the same is being displayed by the government. I would urge the government to get their essay in on time or at least allow us not to devote until we have seen it.
19:57
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
I thank Baroness Fox for that, it has made me think... I will come back to the point you have made. In the 70s, we did not have a National Curriculum. Schools could teach whatever they liked, there was only one subject has to teach, and that was RE. Along came a school called the William Tindale School, in London, which decided that it curriculum was going to be very progressively radical and its teaching methods were very child centric.
Relationships at the school broke down completely between staff and children. And the government of the day had to step in. Then came along Mr Kenneth Clarke, with his National Curriculum, which said, actually, we as a society have a duty to actually spell out what we expect our schoolchildren to learn. And the National Curriculum was born. But now it is not a National Curriculum because it is not taught in Northern Ireland, it is not taught in Scotland, in Wales, as we know, it is not taught in over half of our schools.
Because they can choose what they want to teach. And looking at these amendments, it makes you question what should we teach? Should we teach financial education in schools? I think we should. But why should it be left to an individual school to decide that, shouldn't we, the society, decide that? I firmly be that water safety, that should be taught as part of a unit in schools. It is not down to me, it is down to individual academies to make that decision.
Should we insist that every child, every primary child has been able to -- should be able to have swimming lessons should be able to swim 25 metres before they leave, I think that is really important. It is not down to me or you, it is down to the individual academies. So, I welcome this curriculum review, and I did not put an amendment down saying that water safety should be included, because I am not carrying out the curriculum review, but I have written, the organisation I am a patron of has written, and given evidence as to why that should be the case.
And we wait to see what that review suggests. But I also believe, whilst the strength of the Academy has been that they have had built into the curriculum of their choice, they have had flexibility. And I am just making the case, it won't be for me to decide, the case to say, actually, that should be an opportunity for all schools, to have some flexibility in terms of If I could end by talking about what Baroness Fox said, they do not come to us and say can we agree with it? They get on with it.
Maybe you are right, maybe it should be a political decision about what is taught in the National Curriculum. A very interesting thought and I will leave you with that thought.
Relationships at the school broke down completely between staff and children. And the government of the day had to step in. Then came along Mr Kenneth Clarke, with his National Curriculum, which said, actually, we as a society have a duty to actually spell out what we expect our schoolchildren to learn. And the National Curriculum was born. But now it is not a National Curriculum because it is not taught in Northern Ireland, it is not taught in Scotland, in Wales, as we know, it is not taught in over half of our schools.
Because they can choose what they want to teach. And looking at these amendments, it makes you question what should we teach? Should we teach financial education in schools? I think we should. But why should it be left to an individual school to decide that, shouldn't we, the society, decide that? I firmly be that water safety, that should be taught as part of a unit in schools. It is not down to me, it is down to individual academies to make that decision.
Should we insist that every child, every primary child has been able to -- should be able to have swimming lessons should be able to swim 25 metres before they leave, I think that is really important. It is not down to me or you, it is down to the individual academies. So, I welcome this curriculum review, and I did not put an amendment down saying that water safety should be included, because I am not carrying out the curriculum review, but I have written, the organisation I am a patron of has written, and given evidence as to why that should be the case.
And we wait to see what that review suggests. But I also believe, whilst the strength of the Academy has been that they have had built into the curriculum of their choice, they have had flexibility. And I am just making the case, it won't be for me to decide, the case to say, actually, that should be an opportunity for all schools, to have some flexibility in terms of If I could end by talking about what Baroness Fox said, they do not come to us and say can we agree with it? They get on with it.
Maybe you are right, maybe it should be a political decision about what is taught in the National Curriculum. A very interesting thought and I will leave you with that thought.
20:01
7
Baroness Boycott (Crossbench)
-
7
Baroness Boycott (Crossbench)
502 x which Baroness Bennett have also supported an Baroness Fox called a hobbyhorse. This was Baroness Slater and the amendment. What is the amendment if we are not What is the amendment if we are not going to equip our children for the world in the best possible way. My amendment is to talk about food. At the moment we have 25% of children going into primary school overweight or obese and 40-45% coming out. We must eat and deal with the food system.
The government said part of the education system would be to learn to cook. Five savoury dishes by the time you were 15. This barely happens in school because there is no kitchen, no requirement to do it and if is by the wayside. For 10 years, I ran the London food board and we set up a project called capital growth and it was linked to the Olympics, creating 2500 community gardens in London and 500 wherein schools. They were in super weird places.
One was in a shopping trolley behind the sports part. People were growing potatoes and kids were amazed. In one bag, you got nature, wonder and growing. You got patients and effort and doing something together. There was one particularly inspirational school I went to one day where they had 43 basic first languages and the headmaster explained how to use beans to teach people to do maths. Nine beans and make three rows and you would say that 3x3 and a whole range of things in terms of swapping cultures, but what I wanted to say is that this could be described as a hobbyhorse and it is helpful for children and good for children, but we don't want our children unwell and that is what is happening.
We are ringing up a system of kids who are overweight, they don't do enough exercise, but they are eating terrible food. You can blame parents as much as you like, but healthier food is more expensive and the school must be the place they get taught and encouraged to try different foods to learn how to cook and understand the fuel you put in your body just like what you put in your car is extremely important to what your health outcomes are going to be.
If you have lousy health outcomes, you won't get great jobs or have a good life. You will have six days and not be useful to the country or yourself. This is a country or yourself. This is a fundamental element of life that needs to be incorporated within the school curriculum and not just a hobbyhorse. It depends on the passion for the teachers, most schools I know who have done this have said it has paid off massively. I would like to see if the Minister has some way of incorporating this has some way of incorporating this kind of teaching into the schools of the future.
The government said part of the education system would be to learn to cook. Five savoury dishes by the time you were 15. This barely happens in school because there is no kitchen, no requirement to do it and if is by the wayside. For 10 years, I ran the London food board and we set up a project called capital growth and it was linked to the Olympics, creating 2500 community gardens in London and 500 wherein schools. They were in super weird places.
One was in a shopping trolley behind the sports part. People were growing potatoes and kids were amazed. In one bag, you got nature, wonder and growing. You got patients and effort and doing something together. There was one particularly inspirational school I went to one day where they had 43 basic first languages and the headmaster explained how to use beans to teach people to do maths. Nine beans and make three rows and you would say that 3x3 and a whole range of things in terms of swapping cultures, but what I wanted to say is that this could be described as a hobbyhorse and it is helpful for children and good for children, but we don't want our children unwell and that is what is happening.
We are ringing up a system of kids who are overweight, they don't do enough exercise, but they are eating terrible food. You can blame parents as much as you like, but healthier food is more expensive and the school must be the place they get taught and encouraged to try different foods to learn how to cook and understand the fuel you put in your body just like what you put in your car is extremely important to what your health outcomes are going to be.
If you have lousy health outcomes, you won't get great jobs or have a good life. You will have six days and not be useful to the country or yourself. This is a country or yourself. This is a fundamental element of life that needs to be incorporated within the school curriculum and not just a hobbyhorse. It depends on the passion for the teachers, most schools I know who have done this have said it has paid off massively. I would like to see if the Minister has some way of incorporating this has some way of incorporating this kind of teaching into the schools of the future.
20:05
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
I rise to speak to the amendments in my name in this group and will make the case that clause 47 should not stand part of the bill. There are three main reasons for our objection to clause 47. Firstly, we have discussed in other groups about the value of autonomy at school or trust level combined with a clear accountability. The clause removes the autonomy and those academies had over the curriculum are disregarding the safeguards that exist via the public exam system and the 2019 OFSTED inspection framework.
Without this autonomy, we are stifling innovation and creativity we have seen in recent years where leading trusts developed high quality curriculum is and shared freely with other schools. My noble friend gave fantastic examples and reminded asked of our wonderful free schools. I'm not suggesting the government wants to see a stifling of creativity. I am sure that they want the reverse. I do think they need to explain how this will work in practice if this clause becomes law. I thank Lord Sewell for his powerful intervention and the extraordinary impact on schools in Hackney which is still being ably implemented by the noble Lord Hampton.
Secondly, the Secretary of State has tremendous powers over the curriculum as we heard from Lord Carter of Haslemere. A future Secretary of State could use those powers to be more prescriptive not just in what needs to be the main element of the national curriculum, particularly English, maths and science, but could be descriptive about those elements being taught something which the last government intentionally avoided doing. Indeed, we really wanted to give all schools space outside the core subjects of the National Curriculum so that they could exercise their discretion and reassure Baroness Boycott that I definitely visited schools who are busy beekeeping and doing other things I'm sure she would approve of.
The Secretary of State has the powers to expand the National Curriculum and thirdly as for much of the bill as other noble Lords said we don't see a problem that needs solving in this way. In her time as a chief inspector of OFSTED, there were academies that narrowed the curriculum to much and it was addressed by the inspectorate under the previous framework. The system has checks and balances it needs to make sure schools cannot game the system.
The picture that Lord Storey painted of academies has to be... I do not think it is an accurate one. Given I said earlier public exams Given I said earlier public exams and they are inspected by OFSTED. I would respectfully suggest to the Minister that this clause is not needed, and risks doing more harm than good. We will debate in a later group that we would much rather recognise the strengths to maintain schools and give leaders greater flexibility as well.
There are a number of schools that do not have the facilities needed to deliver certain parts of the curriculum such as design and technology, for example. If this becomes law, can she confirmed the department will fund the necessary investment to address these gaps? I am very pleased to add my name to amendment 443 in the name of Lord Carter of Haslemere. He expertly set out the problems with the Henry VIII powers in this bill and I know that time is short so maybe the noble Lady could write to the noble Lord and all of your Lordships setting out exactly the government understanding of what is Henry VIII powers coverage and by a future Secretary of State because we need legislation to protect asked against all flavours of sector estate.
And government. And so I am estate. And government. And so I am concerned amendment 506 d in the name of Baroness Fox does not reflect the changes that can be made to the curriculum via regulation and can amend primary legislation. Amendments in the name of Lord Knight new -- Lord Agnew of Oulton and looking at schools that are high performing and I support the spirit of these amendments. This debate comes at a time Baroness Fox said we are waiting for recommendations of the curriculum and assessment review and they can be seen for many amendments in the group that there is pressure to introduce more and more subjects into the curriculum.
In 2018, the organisation parents and teachers for excellence counted 213 topics recommended in that year for inclusion into the curriculum. The question remains if the curriculum is expanded, what has to come out? Ministers in both houses have sought to reassure us that we don't need to worry about these changes, but the Minister will understand the curriculum reforms led by the previous government that have contributed so significantly to our improvement in the global rankings of reading, maths and science were very hard-won and hardfought.
In addition to our principled objections to removing autonomy from school leaders rather than extending it to schools, there is a deep-seated worry the siren call for a more progressive approach to the curriculum might gain traction despite the efforts of the review team led by Professor Francis of whom I have great respect. I would like to close with the words not of Ernest Bevan, but also quoting as others have done in this group from a blog written by Mark McCord, from the advantage schools trust.
He speaks for many of us of why we all feel so anxious the government gets this curriculum review right. He writes "to offer a demanding powerful curriculum to every child is not elitist. It is egal at Aryan. It says to the child you are worthy of this knowledge, you are capable of complexity and you deserve access to accumulated wisdom and accomplishments of those that came before you and this is your birthright and it is yours to own and detect.
We are not gatekeepers, we adore openers and if we do not open those doors especially for the children least likely to find them on their own, then we are complicit in keeping them shut." I beg to move. them shut." I beg to move.
Without this autonomy, we are stifling innovation and creativity we have seen in recent years where leading trusts developed high quality curriculum is and shared freely with other schools. My noble friend gave fantastic examples and reminded asked of our wonderful free schools. I'm not suggesting the government wants to see a stifling of creativity. I am sure that they want the reverse. I do think they need to explain how this will work in practice if this clause becomes law. I thank Lord Sewell for his powerful intervention and the extraordinary impact on schools in Hackney which is still being ably implemented by the noble Lord Hampton.
Secondly, the Secretary of State has tremendous powers over the curriculum as we heard from Lord Carter of Haslemere. A future Secretary of State could use those powers to be more prescriptive not just in what needs to be the main element of the national curriculum, particularly English, maths and science, but could be descriptive about those elements being taught something which the last government intentionally avoided doing. Indeed, we really wanted to give all schools space outside the core subjects of the National Curriculum so that they could exercise their discretion and reassure Baroness Boycott that I definitely visited schools who are busy beekeeping and doing other things I'm sure she would approve of.
The Secretary of State has the powers to expand the National Curriculum and thirdly as for much of the bill as other noble Lords said we don't see a problem that needs solving in this way. In her time as a chief inspector of OFSTED, there were academies that narrowed the curriculum to much and it was addressed by the inspectorate under the previous framework. The system has checks and balances it needs to make sure schools cannot game the system.
The picture that Lord Storey painted of academies has to be... I do not think it is an accurate one. Given I said earlier public exams Given I said earlier public exams and they are inspected by OFSTED. I would respectfully suggest to the Minister that this clause is not needed, and risks doing more harm than good. We will debate in a later group that we would much rather recognise the strengths to maintain schools and give leaders greater flexibility as well.
There are a number of schools that do not have the facilities needed to deliver certain parts of the curriculum such as design and technology, for example. If this becomes law, can she confirmed the department will fund the necessary investment to address these gaps? I am very pleased to add my name to amendment 443 in the name of Lord Carter of Haslemere. He expertly set out the problems with the Henry VIII powers in this bill and I know that time is short so maybe the noble Lady could write to the noble Lord and all of your Lordships setting out exactly the government understanding of what is Henry VIII powers coverage and by a future Secretary of State because we need legislation to protect asked against all flavours of sector estate.
And government. And so I am estate. And government. And so I am concerned amendment 506 d in the name of Baroness Fox does not reflect the changes that can be made to the curriculum via regulation and can amend primary legislation. Amendments in the name of Lord Knight new -- Lord Agnew of Oulton and looking at schools that are high performing and I support the spirit of these amendments. This debate comes at a time Baroness Fox said we are waiting for recommendations of the curriculum and assessment review and they can be seen for many amendments in the group that there is pressure to introduce more and more subjects into the curriculum.
In 2018, the organisation parents and teachers for excellence counted 213 topics recommended in that year for inclusion into the curriculum. The question remains if the curriculum is expanded, what has to come out? Ministers in both houses have sought to reassure us that we don't need to worry about these changes, but the Minister will understand the curriculum reforms led by the previous government that have contributed so significantly to our improvement in the global rankings of reading, maths and science were very hard-won and hardfought.
In addition to our principled objections to removing autonomy from school leaders rather than extending it to schools, there is a deep-seated worry the siren call for a more progressive approach to the curriculum might gain traction despite the efforts of the review team led by Professor Francis of whom I have great respect. I would like to close with the words not of Ernest Bevan, but also quoting as others have done in this group from a blog written by Mark McCord, from the advantage schools trust.
He speaks for many of us of why we all feel so anxious the government gets this curriculum review right. He writes "to offer a demanding powerful curriculum to every child is not elitist. It is egal at Aryan. It says to the child you are worthy of this knowledge, you are capable of complexity and you deserve access to accumulated wisdom and accomplishments of those that came before you and this is your birthright and it is yours to own and detect.
We are not gatekeepers, we adore openers and if we do not open those doors especially for the children least likely to find them on their own, then we are complicit in keeping them shut." I beg to move. them shut." I beg to move.
20:13
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
And up-to-date knowledge rich curriculum is key to ensuring the high and rising to standards in high and rising to standards in schools. Setting and they have the right to expect their child to access consistent high quality poor education that build the knowledge and skills they need to thrive without the worry that some subjects that some may have been dropped for ease is evaluating the statutory assessment system. The final report helps us develop a rich, cutting- edge curriculum that secures a strong foundation in reading, writing and maths while providing breadth to give children culturally rich education that prepares them for life, work and the future.
So we want all children to benefit from this which is why clause 47 requires academies which teach over half of pupils to teach that reformed curriculum along time. This point is important, not just in this debate but those that we will have in the coming groups. What we are talking about in the legislation is the basic and appropriate requirements basic and appropriate requirements for the vast majority of our schools and a growing majority.
I must say a National Curriculum which applies to a dwindling minority of schools is not a National Curriculum. This requirement has a floor but no ceiling. Teachers will continue to have flexibility to adapt to best meet the needs of their pupils. Let me turn to the amendments. 440 and 442 in the name of Lord Agnew 442 in the name of Lord Agnew 442 in the name of Lord Agnew The implicit premise is that teaching the National Curriculum as a burden for which good schools should be released, but it is not.
It provides stability and certainty for schools and parents without limiting the scope for any school to deliver the best for its students. Ofsted do not issue single headline adjustment -- judgement any more. We could not support the idea of encouraging schools to make fundamental changes to their entire curriculum on the basis of those judgements. Turning to amendment 502, in the name of Lord Hampton, this amendment seeks to exempt academies and maintained schools judged outstanding or equivalent, from a range of requirements, the curriculum requirements, as I have said, do not constrain schools from being excellent, innovative, or reflective of the needs of their pupils.
They provide a minimum assurance, the vast majority of which has been agreed for many years, should apply to all schools. This amendment would remove the foundations, which would be reinstated if the school was judged less than outstanding. In a way that would be disruptive for both pupils and staff. Turning to amendment 441, which seeks to exempt schools from offering the National Curriculum to pupils with special educational needs or disabilities. I understand needs or disabilities. I understand the motive of the noble Lord to probe the position of the government in this area, something which we will have plenty more time to debate and think about in detail.
Our view is that wherever they can be effectively supported to do so, pupils should have the opportunity to achieve and thrive in their local mainstream school. That includes accessing the National Curriculum. Assistive technology is one means by which pupils can thrive in a mainstream setting and I think there are important lessons that we would want to learn and develop about the contribution of assistive technology. In a supporting pupils. But it is not the only one, we do not want to give schools the message that assistive technology should be a way of denying children access to the National Curriculum.
Of course, some pupils with SEND will struggle to access the full curriculum, in such cases, arrangements can be made to supply it, for example, to an education, health and care plans. Turning to amendment 443, tabled by the noble Lord, which seeks to exempt academies from some curriculum changes, I recognise his intention in this amendment was to... His intention was to accuse the government but... I will take it as an opportunity to give more... I hope give an explanation about the position in this clause, this measure extends existing delegated powers from the Education Act 2002, which applies to maintained schools, to academies, it does not take any new ones.
Using delegated powers in this way ensures that some areas of the curriculum can change at pace, in response to changing educational, social, technological and economic needs. Whilst providing appropriate parliamentary oversight. There is nothing backdoor about our approach, the details is clear, as shown by the fact that Lord Carter has identified it, it was of course part of the submission, that the government made in relation to this Bill, to the delegated powers and reform committee, who did not raise concerns about this tickler provision.
Turning to amendment 444, tabled by Lord Storey, which seeks to ensure flexibility to take account of local circumstances in the delivery of the National Curriculum. Whilst also requiring any changes to be made under the affirmative procedure. Ensuring that schools have the flexibility to adapt teaching to their specific circumstances is crucial, the current framework provides this. The programs of study allow schools to meet the needs of students by tailoring the local curriculum content and delivery. The proposed framework, in the amendment, would add unnecessary complexity to the National Curriculum, which already has core and foundation subjects and can create confusion schools.
The current process for making changes has worked well over the years, with appropriate consultation requirements, and parliamentary scrutiny. There is no intention to change that process in this legislation. Requiring affirmative approval of any changes, which might be minor, would risk being a disproportionate use of time and could cause delays and uncertainty. Turning to amendment 497, tabled by the noble Lord, which seeks to require a further curriculum review focused on artificial intelligence. Andy spoken to by my noble friend, Baroness Hayman's, who made some important points about the speed with which the technology and environment in which our children are living is happening.
The raise of AI means that it is important that pupils develop digital and critical thinking skills and be discerning about what they read online, the curriculum has been asked to ensure the curriculum sufficiently prepared children and young people for future life and work. Building the knowledge and skills that they need to thrive. This already includes digital skills. The final recommendations will be published in the autumn, along with the government response. We have also appointed an expert group to advise on digital, AI and technology, and taking account of their recognitions and think you had better prepare children to be ready for an AI and tech enabled feature.
Turning to amendment 502D, tabled by the noble Baroness, which seeks to ensure that all primary schools teach financial education, being able to manage your money is an essential life skill, the review has heard, consistently, from children and people and their parents that they want more focus on the applied knowledge and skills that will equip them for later life, such as financial education. Pupils in maintained schools are currently taught about money through the National Curriculum requirements for mathematics, however, the review is considering whether there is sufficient coverage of key knowledge and skills, including financial education, to prepare young people for future life and to thrive in a fast changing world.
Turning to amendment 502X, tabled by the noble Lady, Baroness Bennett, introduced by the noble Lady, Baroness Boycott, which seeks to proscribe teaching hours to promote knowledge of food growing in preparation. Cooking and preparation of food and understanding, as the noble Lady emphasised, where our food comes from, is an important life skill that teaches children how to feed themselves and others healthy and affordable food. There is no reason to dictate teaching hours here, and not for other important subjects.
Doing so would limit flexibility, to organise a curriculum to meet the needs of their pupils. Turning to amendment 502YL, also in the name of Baroness Bennett, although I think she did not introduce it, so I will leave that for now and go on to leave that for now and go on to amendment 506 a, tabled by the noble Lady, Baroness Fox, which seeks to make sure there is consideration of the curriculum and assessment review. Following the reviews final report, due in autumn, we will develop proposals for consultation and labour regulations to effect the changes, we do not expect to need a Bill.
Schools will have plenty of time to plan and prepare for the changes, clause 47 will not be commenced until reformed curriculum comes into effect. The whole process will take not six months but several will take not six months but several years. So I do not accept the charge that we are expecting to be marked before we produce our essay, we are providing a considerable period of time for the planning and approach which I think was part of what the noble Lady was arguing for.
I hope, giving those assurances, and responding to amendments, I have convinced the noble Lord to withdraw.
So we want all children to benefit from this which is why clause 47 requires academies which teach over half of pupils to teach that reformed curriculum along time. This point is important, not just in this debate but those that we will have in the coming groups. What we are talking about in the legislation is the basic and appropriate requirements basic and appropriate requirements for the vast majority of our schools and a growing majority.
I must say a National Curriculum which applies to a dwindling minority of schools is not a National Curriculum. This requirement has a floor but no ceiling. Teachers will continue to have flexibility to adapt to best meet the needs of their pupils. Let me turn to the amendments. 440 and 442 in the name of Lord Agnew 442 in the name of Lord Agnew 442 in the name of Lord Agnew The implicit premise is that teaching the National Curriculum as a burden for which good schools should be released, but it is not.
It provides stability and certainty for schools and parents without limiting the scope for any school to deliver the best for its students. Ofsted do not issue single headline adjustment -- judgement any more. We could not support the idea of encouraging schools to make fundamental changes to their entire curriculum on the basis of those judgements. Turning to amendment 502, in the name of Lord Hampton, this amendment seeks to exempt academies and maintained schools judged outstanding or equivalent, from a range of requirements, the curriculum requirements, as I have said, do not constrain schools from being excellent, innovative, or reflective of the needs of their pupils.
They provide a minimum assurance, the vast majority of which has been agreed for many years, should apply to all schools. This amendment would remove the foundations, which would be reinstated if the school was judged less than outstanding. In a way that would be disruptive for both pupils and staff. Turning to amendment 441, which seeks to exempt schools from offering the National Curriculum to pupils with special educational needs or disabilities. I understand needs or disabilities. I understand the motive of the noble Lord to probe the position of the government in this area, something which we will have plenty more time to debate and think about in detail.
Our view is that wherever they can be effectively supported to do so, pupils should have the opportunity to achieve and thrive in their local mainstream school. That includes accessing the National Curriculum. Assistive technology is one means by which pupils can thrive in a mainstream setting and I think there are important lessons that we would want to learn and develop about the contribution of assistive technology. In a supporting pupils. But it is not the only one, we do not want to give schools the message that assistive technology should be a way of denying children access to the National Curriculum.
Of course, some pupils with SEND will struggle to access the full curriculum, in such cases, arrangements can be made to supply it, for example, to an education, health and care plans. Turning to amendment 443, tabled by the noble Lord, which seeks to exempt academies from some curriculum changes, I recognise his intention in this amendment was to... His intention was to accuse the government but... I will take it as an opportunity to give more... I hope give an explanation about the position in this clause, this measure extends existing delegated powers from the Education Act 2002, which applies to maintained schools, to academies, it does not take any new ones.
Using delegated powers in this way ensures that some areas of the curriculum can change at pace, in response to changing educational, social, technological and economic needs. Whilst providing appropriate parliamentary oversight. There is nothing backdoor about our approach, the details is clear, as shown by the fact that Lord Carter has identified it, it was of course part of the submission, that the government made in relation to this Bill, to the delegated powers and reform committee, who did not raise concerns about this tickler provision.
Turning to amendment 444, tabled by Lord Storey, which seeks to ensure flexibility to take account of local circumstances in the delivery of the National Curriculum. Whilst also requiring any changes to be made under the affirmative procedure. Ensuring that schools have the flexibility to adapt teaching to their specific circumstances is crucial, the current framework provides this. The programs of study allow schools to meet the needs of students by tailoring the local curriculum content and delivery. The proposed framework, in the amendment, would add unnecessary complexity to the National Curriculum, which already has core and foundation subjects and can create confusion schools.
The current process for making changes has worked well over the years, with appropriate consultation requirements, and parliamentary scrutiny. There is no intention to change that process in this legislation. Requiring affirmative approval of any changes, which might be minor, would risk being a disproportionate use of time and could cause delays and uncertainty. Turning to amendment 497, tabled by the noble Lord, which seeks to require a further curriculum review focused on artificial intelligence. Andy spoken to by my noble friend, Baroness Hayman's, who made some important points about the speed with which the technology and environment in which our children are living is happening.
The raise of AI means that it is important that pupils develop digital and critical thinking skills and be discerning about what they read online, the curriculum has been asked to ensure the curriculum sufficiently prepared children and young people for future life and work. Building the knowledge and skills that they need to thrive. This already includes digital skills. The final recommendations will be published in the autumn, along with the government response. We have also appointed an expert group to advise on digital, AI and technology, and taking account of their recognitions and think you had better prepare children to be ready for an AI and tech enabled feature.
Turning to amendment 502D, tabled by the noble Baroness, which seeks to ensure that all primary schools teach financial education, being able to manage your money is an essential life skill, the review has heard, consistently, from children and people and their parents that they want more focus on the applied knowledge and skills that will equip them for later life, such as financial education. Pupils in maintained schools are currently taught about money through the National Curriculum requirements for mathematics, however, the review is considering whether there is sufficient coverage of key knowledge and skills, including financial education, to prepare young people for future life and to thrive in a fast changing world.
Turning to amendment 502X, tabled by the noble Lady, Baroness Bennett, introduced by the noble Lady, Baroness Boycott, which seeks to proscribe teaching hours to promote knowledge of food growing in preparation. Cooking and preparation of food and understanding, as the noble Lady emphasised, where our food comes from, is an important life skill that teaches children how to feed themselves and others healthy and affordable food. There is no reason to dictate teaching hours here, and not for other important subjects.
Doing so would limit flexibility, to organise a curriculum to meet the needs of their pupils. Turning to amendment 502YL, also in the name of Baroness Bennett, although I think she did not introduce it, so I will leave that for now and go on to leave that for now and go on to amendment 506 a, tabled by the noble Lady, Baroness Fox, which seeks to make sure there is consideration of the curriculum and assessment review. Following the reviews final report, due in autumn, we will develop proposals for consultation and labour regulations to effect the changes, we do not expect to need a Bill.
Schools will have plenty of time to plan and prepare for the changes, clause 47 will not be commenced until reformed curriculum comes into effect. The whole process will take not six months but several will take not six months but several years. So I do not accept the charge that we are expecting to be marked before we produce our essay, we are providing a considerable period of time for the planning and approach which I think was part of what the noble Lady was arguing for.
I hope, giving those assurances, and responding to amendments, I have convinced the noble Lord to withdraw.
20:26
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
I thank the noble Baroness for her conference events are, I have had much good intentions and a great deal of hope hung on the curriculum assessment review, but not much acknowledgement of the ways that a number of the noble Lord have pointed out that this clause could backfire. Baroness Evans, I think, laid out lucidly, how freedoms have enriched and strengthened education, enriched and strengthened education, Baroness Fox echoed the concerns about the undetermined curriculum and reminded us about the essence and purpose of education and the risks of limiting the scrutiny of what is taught.
We had a case study and a couple of interesting points, design and technology, GCSE entries, actually started dropping off in the 1990s, most of the decline that has happened has been the result of schools using their autonomy to structure timetables to teach less of it and have fewer people taking GCSEs, the safeguards weren't there around design and technology for a long period. Thinking about those controls and incentives really matters. My theatres remain that this clause might encourage lipservice to the detail of a new curriculum, whatever it is, but if that comes at the expense of the dynamism that has been generated in the sector in recent years, it will drag English education backwards and in a few years time, we might find ourselves languishing with Scotland and Wales in the international league tables, wondering what we have done and why we thought it was a good idea.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Nevertheless, I understand where we are out and the curriculum and we are out and the curriculum and assessment review needs to report,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and I will, for now, withdraw. Amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 441. Not moved. FourFourTwo, Lord Agnew, not moved. 443, Lord Carter, not moved. The 443, Lord Carter, not moved. The question is that clause 47 stand part of the Bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. Amendment 444, Lord Storey. Not moved. The question Lord Storey. Not moved. The question is that clause 48 stand part of the Bill.
As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
"Not content". The contents have it. I beg to move that the House be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg to move that the House be resumed and then we will consider the statement and not return to the the statement and not return to the Bill before 2108... Have I got that right?
**** Possible New Speaker ****
right? The question is that the House be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The question is that the House be resumed and not reconvene until 2108. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Questions on a statement made in the House of Commons on Monday, 8 September on the defence industrial
We had a case study and a couple of interesting points, design and technology, GCSE entries, actually started dropping off in the 1990s, most of the decline that has happened has been the result of schools using their autonomy to structure timetables to teach less of it and have fewer people taking GCSEs, the safeguards weren't there around design and technology for a long period. Thinking about those controls and incentives really matters. My theatres remain that this clause might encourage lipservice to the detail of a new curriculum, whatever it is, but if that comes at the expense of the dynamism that has been generated in the sector in recent years, it will drag English education backwards and in a few years time, we might find ourselves languishing with Scotland and Wales in the international league tables, wondering what we have done and why we thought it was a good idea.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Nevertheless, I understand where we are out and the curriculum and we are out and the curriculum and assessment review needs to report,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and I will, for now, withdraw. Amendment is by leave withdrawn. Amendment 441. Not moved. FourFourTwo, Lord Agnew, not moved. 443, Lord Carter, not moved. The 443, Lord Carter, not moved. The question is that clause 47 stand part of the Bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The the contrary, "Not content". The contents have it. Amendment 444, Lord Storey. Not moved. The question Lord Storey. Not moved. The question is that clause 48 stand part of the Bill.
As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
"Not content". The contents have it. I beg to move that the House be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg to move that the House be resumed and then we will consider the statement and not return to the the statement and not return to the Bill before 2108... Have I got that right?
**** Possible New Speaker ****
right? The question is that the House be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The question is that the House be resumed and not reconvene until 2108. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Questions on a statement made in the House of Commons on Monday, 8 September on the defence industrial
20:30
Baroness Goldie (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Goldie (Conservative)
record my support for the enormous amount of work that has clearly gone into the production of this strategy. Very evident is that the Ministry of Defence, have put their thinking caps on, done the hard work and constructed a plan based around future requirements. There is therefore much to be applauded, the six priority outcomes are absolutely aiming the right direction and the commitment to strengthening the MoD commitment to strengthening the MoD commitment to strengthening the MoD It is essential for our resilience.
It has never been more evident of a Russian incursion into a NATO airspace, the largest attack in Ukraine by Russia to date. This escalation is deeply troubling and underlines the importance of swiftly putting Britain into war fighting readiness. This is a solid piece of work, but a solid piece of work crumbles if the bricks are not cemented together and the cement is implementation at a wartime pace. What matters now is the words in these pages related to missiles, drones and ships, and critical is procurement.
The procurement essentially dried up and the SDR is yet to see the major procurement contract the MoD promised. Procurement is the lifeblood of a successful strategy. May I ask the Minister how will the government ensure the typhoon factory remains open and thriving? We have heard the government will open up six new munitions factories and they will have orders. Where will they be placed? I understand the investment plan looks at the procurement endeavour, but when? The defence agency has been waiting since July of last year and industry must have greater certainty.
Can I implore the Minister to do everything in his power to ensure the investment plan is published as soon as possible? In that connection, will the UK defence that connection, will the UK defence orders be joining the queue, or will there be orders for export? When it comes to the new structures within the MoD, coordination and accountability to the Secretary of State is paramount and at the same time duplication must be eradicated. The SDR and the strategy both mention the creation of bodies within the MoD.
UK defence innovation, defence industrial joint council, the office of exports, the dispense offers for small business growth and the national armaments directive. The strategic defence review identified 10% reduction in civil service costs for 2013. Can the Minister clarify the addition of these new offices the MoD will achieve that cost reduction? What existing structures will be merged or abolished? We will be auditing progress. The Minister should update the House on progress of appointing the national armament director.
Page 30 of the industrial strategy details and nine milestones to be reached by the end of the year. I do not believe any of these have yet materialised. The end of the year is fast approaching. Is the Minister confident the 2025 timeline will be met? In conclusion, I want to raise an issue that will come as no surprise to the Minister, the budget. We have raised concerns about the bundling together of intelligence spending within the defence budget.
That means despite government claims of spending 2.6% of GDP defence by 2027, the money available for defence spending is 2.2% of GDP. I'm not trying to catch the Minister out, but I want to make it clear that we may have increased defence spending, but this is simply not enough to deliver everything in the SDR and industrial strategy. A Russian incursion into Polish airspace yesterday, the triggering of articles four serves as a stark warning. Complacency is not an option.
The contents of the strategy which these benches fully support cannot be a prayer for the future. Wartime pace means delivering from now on and there is no safe
**** Possible New Speaker ****
alternative. It is a pleasure and a challenge
It has never been more evident of a Russian incursion into a NATO airspace, the largest attack in Ukraine by Russia to date. This escalation is deeply troubling and underlines the importance of swiftly putting Britain into war fighting readiness. This is a solid piece of work, but a solid piece of work crumbles if the bricks are not cemented together and the cement is implementation at a wartime pace. What matters now is the words in these pages related to missiles, drones and ships, and critical is procurement.
The procurement essentially dried up and the SDR is yet to see the major procurement contract the MoD promised. Procurement is the lifeblood of a successful strategy. May I ask the Minister how will the government ensure the typhoon factory remains open and thriving? We have heard the government will open up six new munitions factories and they will have orders. Where will they be placed? I understand the investment plan looks at the procurement endeavour, but when? The defence agency has been waiting since July of last year and industry must have greater certainty.
Can I implore the Minister to do everything in his power to ensure the investment plan is published as soon as possible? In that connection, will the UK defence that connection, will the UK defence orders be joining the queue, or will there be orders for export? When it comes to the new structures within the MoD, coordination and accountability to the Secretary of State is paramount and at the same time duplication must be eradicated. The SDR and the strategy both mention the creation of bodies within the MoD.
UK defence innovation, defence industrial joint council, the office of exports, the dispense offers for small business growth and the national armaments directive. The strategic defence review identified 10% reduction in civil service costs for 2013. Can the Minister clarify the addition of these new offices the MoD will achieve that cost reduction? What existing structures will be merged or abolished? We will be auditing progress. The Minister should update the House on progress of appointing the national armament director.
Page 30 of the industrial strategy details and nine milestones to be reached by the end of the year. I do not believe any of these have yet materialised. The end of the year is fast approaching. Is the Minister confident the 2025 timeline will be met? In conclusion, I want to raise an issue that will come as no surprise to the Minister, the budget. We have raised concerns about the bundling together of intelligence spending within the defence budget.
That means despite government claims of spending 2.6% of GDP defence by 2027, the money available for defence spending is 2.2% of GDP. I'm not trying to catch the Minister out, but I want to make it clear that we may have increased defence spending, but this is simply not enough to deliver everything in the SDR and industrial strategy. A Russian incursion into Polish airspace yesterday, the triggering of articles four serves as a stark warning. Complacency is not an option.
The contents of the strategy which these benches fully support cannot be a prayer for the future. Wartime pace means delivering from now on and there is no safe
**** Possible New Speaker ****
alternative. It is a pleasure and a challenge
20:35
Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
It is a pleasure and a challenge to follow Paris Goldie -- Baroness to follow Paris Goldie -- Baroness Goldie who has great expertise in this area. We welcome the announcement of the defence industrial strategy and support the objectives of boosting defence capability and increasing economic activity in our country. As someone who worked in the sector who no longer has interest in it, jobs in the defence sector are high-quality jobs that pay well over the national average and they are worthwhile jobs for our citizens.
More than that they contribute in large measure to resilience and security of our country. I will focus on procurement and I will look at the questions that she asked. I'm interested in the answers. It is clear and improved framework is needed and we look and the -- at the complexity so big changes are needed. We support the aims of involving SMEs and driving innovation. These are important, but in section 7 of the strategy setting out details of process, but I would suggest as well as process, this requires a change of culture right across the sector, from the MoD to the primes and SMEs.
How will the government fast track the necessary culture changes that we need in order to move at pace? The implementation of a UK offshore regime is welcome and under sections of the strategy are encouraging and I appreciate that consultation is needed, but there are contracts hopefully being met already before this regime is put in and I wonder if the Minister can tell the House how if any offsets will be gained from contracts left for then. Similarly, a British focus is good and important, but contracts are being met that do the exact opposite, contracts that call into question the future of established Pacitti in this country, once lost not regained.
Can the Minister ensure that these are reviewed as soon as possible to ensure permanent damage is not done before this strategy is implemented. I will be happy to discuss more details on that. In the Spring Statement, Rachel Reeves confirmed 2.2 billion of funding. This increase will be paid for by cuts in overseas aid which the Minister knows we deplore, but this contains spending of £773 million on a government estimate, but this is not actually new money. This is out of the pot announced by the Chancellor.
At the time, the Chancellor announced a defence Chancellor announced a defence growth board. I ask the noble Lord what the role it will play and what it plays in preparation of the strategy and how it fits with defence investors advisory group which was announced in the strategy. I would also like information on whereabouts the defence growth partnership that has been in place for some time shares the aims around SMEs and innovation. What role is it and is it working and how does it contribute? A clear drag on the strategy is the lack of available skills and part of the announcement includes investment which is largely focused on five new defence technology colleges and that is also welcome, and so is the emphasis on apprentices, what about Skills England given that they were supposed to be part of the curriculum.
It is clear that things are moving fast globally and in the wrong direction and it underscores the importance of working alongside our allies in securing our defence. I am sure they will tell us about the groups as well as NATO. It will be and more can be done to deepen cooperation with our European allies. They shared security challenges and they can build scale to rearm at pace. Will the government agree to join the European defence agency? And while EU groups have a limited role, there is action for Europe, safe defence fund being established by the EU Commission.
Recognising the opportunity that it presents, the Minister of State Stephen Doughty said to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee on Monday it is 150 billion in instruments, very significant and could lead to significant opportunities by how it affects opportunities. Could he update the House on the UK discussion with the commission and discussion with the commission and nationstates on participation and tell us if UK industry will be eligible to bid in the first round which I believe is in November.
I have lots more queries but I will close by saying the strategy is a first step and I concur with the noble Baroness that implementation is the key to success and we will support and work with the government to help deliver this strategy and its objectives.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to thank Lord Fox for his constructive comments about the strategy and the important questions he asked. I know it is
Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
It is a pleasure and a challenge to follow Paris Goldie -- Baroness to follow Paris Goldie -- Baroness Goldie who has great expertise in this area. We welcome the announcement of the defence industrial strategy and support the objectives of boosting defence capability and increasing economic activity in our country. As someone who worked in the sector who no longer has interest in it, jobs in the defence sector are high-quality jobs that pay well over the national average and they are worthwhile jobs for our citizens.
More than that they contribute in large measure to resilience and security of our country. I will focus on procurement and I will look at the questions that she asked. I'm interested in the answers. It is clear and improved framework is needed and we look and the -- at the complexity so big changes are needed. We support the aims of involving SMEs and driving innovation. These are important, but in section 7 of the strategy setting out details of process, but I would suggest as well as process, this requires a change of culture right across the sector, from the MoD to the primes and SMEs.
How will the government fast track the necessary culture changes that we need in order to move at pace? The implementation of a UK offshore regime is welcome and under sections of the strategy are encouraging and I appreciate that consultation is needed, but there are contracts hopefully being met already before this regime is put in and I wonder if the Minister can tell the House how if any offsets will be gained from contracts left for then. Similarly, a British focus is good and important, but contracts are being met that do the exact opposite, contracts that call into question the future of established Pacitti in this country, once lost not regained.
Can the Minister ensure that these are reviewed as soon as possible to ensure permanent damage is not done before this strategy is implemented. I will be happy to discuss more details on that. In the Spring Statement, Rachel Reeves confirmed 2.2 billion of funding. This increase will be paid for by cuts in overseas aid which the Minister knows we deplore, but this contains spending of £773 million on a government estimate, but this is not actually new money. This is out of the pot announced by the Chancellor.
At the time, the Chancellor announced a defence Chancellor announced a defence growth board. I ask the noble Lord what the role it will play and what it plays in preparation of the strategy and how it fits with defence investors advisory group which was announced in the strategy. I would also like information on whereabouts the defence growth partnership that has been in place for some time shares the aims around SMEs and innovation. What role is it and is it working and how does it contribute? A clear drag on the strategy is the lack of available skills and part of the announcement includes investment which is largely focused on five new defence technology colleges and that is also welcome, and so is the emphasis on apprentices, what about Skills England given that they were supposed to be part of the curriculum.
It is clear that things are moving fast globally and in the wrong direction and it underscores the importance of working alongside our allies in securing our defence. I am sure they will tell us about the groups as well as NATO. It will be and more can be done to deepen cooperation with our European allies. They shared security challenges and they can build scale to rearm at pace. Will the government agree to join the European defence agency? And while EU groups have a limited role, there is action for Europe, safe defence fund being established by the EU Commission.
Recognising the opportunity that it presents, the Minister of State Stephen Doughty said to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee on Monday it is 150 billion in instruments, very significant and could lead to significant opportunities by how it affects opportunities. Could he update the House on the UK discussion with the commission and discussion with the commission and nationstates on participation and tell us if UK industry will be eligible to bid in the first round which I believe is in November.
I have lots more queries but I will close by saying the strategy is a first step and I concur with the noble Baroness that implementation is the key to success and we will support and work with the government to help deliver this strategy and its objectives.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I would like to thank Lord Fox for his constructive comments about the strategy and the important questions he asked. I know it is
20:41
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
questions he asked. I know it is from a position of support.. I would like to say the same and Baroness Goldie's questions come from overall support for the strategy, plots leaking clarification -- seeking clarification of the foundation. I appreciate Lord Fox and Baroness Goldie and the comments made. I would like to start by saying it is important that we as a nation, notwithstanding the points made, don't actually praise some of the things that are happening.
I say this because I was at DSE I just down at the Excel centre which I know the noble Baroness and noble Lord will be aware of. What a phenomenal statement about UK industry. What a phenomenal statement about UK business, both small, medium and large. A phenomenal statement about the projection of British power. Across the globe. Many noble Lords and Baronesses have spoken to me and have been today or yesterday or will go tomorrow and they have been overwhelmed by the number of foreign visitors and foreign Armed Forces and foreign businesses that are here as well.
Yes, there are questions about our strategy, there are questions about how we might do better, but I challenge anybody and this is for the audience out there rather than in here, to not say we have an awful lot of which to be proud in this country when we look at DSE ice. That is the view shared by everyone. The strategy seeks to do more in a lot of ways and we ran through a number of questions asked by her and Lord Fox and it is about getting to war fighting readiness.
We cannot have a situation now or in the future where we cannot do what we want to do because we cannot produce the equipment we need at the pace than we need it. We must do better than we have done and part of that is building sovereign capability to do so. We will work with international allies but sovereign capability has been over the past few decades something we have not given as much attention to. The noble Baroness is right and Lord Fox asked as well about the implementation.
A whole chapter dedicated to implementation. Each and every part of that art nature six -- matrixes about being helpful to account. I know that Baroness is right on page 30 as she would have pointed out that there are things yet to be implemented and I will point out that it was published on Monday but we are doing our best to get going. On implementation, I would like to redirect to the implementation team headed by a senior civil servant has been created.
The Chancellor and Defence Secretary, known to Lord Fox, they hold the department to account via defence growth board and the defence industrial joint council will monitor delivery with industry partners. The defence growth board continues to exist in the form I outlined into ensure that these things that are outlined are delivered, which includes working hard to protect jobs with respect to Typhoon. The munitions factory allocated £6 billion for that over the lifetime of Parliament with six additional munitions sites to ensure that we can have munitions.
The investment plan will be part of it. We will see how we can do that. The 10% reduction in the civil service headcount the noble Baroness For all of it, trying to give a greater focus, they are not in addition to the existing bodies, they are going to be bodies that are more directly focused to deliver the outcome that we want. We will substitute to these other bodies and wait to see how that is happening. We have an interim director who will be in post for a period of time whilst we recruit the new director, I am not certain of the exact timetable for that, but she will know that we have an interim director in place.
In terms of defence spending, the amalgamation of that is not smoke and mirrors, it is 20 reflect the reality of the new situation, the new geopolitical context, where we talk about homeland defence, we talk about cyber, the importance of security agencies working with the Armed Forces, the totality of the defence and security of our nation encapsulates all of the above, that is the totality of the spending. The noble Baroness and others can debate whether that is enough, but that is the concept behind joining them together, to give a sense of how much is being spent, both in the sphere.
I know that Lord Beamish is behind us and will know the importance of the work that intelligence does to keep us safe, particularly from a homeland perspective. Lord Fox asked about fast tracking range, -- change, let me give one example, why is it that urgent requirements only operate when there is a war or a crisis? Why can't we bring the same culture, I think the noble Baroness ask this, why can't we bring that same culture... That same attitude, to the situation when it is not a crisis or a war? It is not about being flippant, about disregarding process but rather think, let's get these decisions made, if we can do that, we will do us all a favour, I am happy to meet with the noble Lord, and others, if he wishes, with my colleague, I will volunteer him for it, the procurement Minister, and we can discuss the point he made about offset, this is a really interesting concept, as we go forward, the idea of having mutual benefits, if we buy abroad, how we can ensure that we do not lose any benefit that might accrue, or a complimentary benefit, but I take this point, which is what happens before the system comes into effect, we are going to consult on that, what happens if decisions are made now, I will take some advice on that and talk to the noble Lord and his friends to see what the situation is with respect to that.
He mentioned the issue of skills, skills is a massive issue, if anybody... If anywhere else needs a cultural change, it is trying to ensure that skills-based op occasion, skills- based learning, skills-based opportunities are seen as valuable. If I might say, that has been a problem for decades, the skills option is not seen as much... We are trying to deal with that through the technical colleges, we are going to work with Skills England, the devolved nations, colleges here rather than...
In terms of working with European allies, of course we will, we have got the UK-EU security partnership, I will just say, if this government had not negotiated that, you cannot enter safe without any UK security partnership. The fact that we have got that means the questions means that we can start at them. I think it is an exciting time, I think the noble Baroness and noble Lord for their support, I hope I have answered the questions they asked, it is an exciting time, the defence industry is on the front line with this, if we want to defend moxie, we need to develop our industrial capability as well.
I say this because I was at DSE I just down at the Excel centre which I know the noble Baroness and noble Lord will be aware of. What a phenomenal statement about UK industry. What a phenomenal statement about UK business, both small, medium and large. A phenomenal statement about the projection of British power. Across the globe. Many noble Lords and Baronesses have spoken to me and have been today or yesterday or will go tomorrow and they have been overwhelmed by the number of foreign visitors and foreign Armed Forces and foreign businesses that are here as well.
Yes, there are questions about our strategy, there are questions about how we might do better, but I challenge anybody and this is for the audience out there rather than in here, to not say we have an awful lot of which to be proud in this country when we look at DSE ice. That is the view shared by everyone. The strategy seeks to do more in a lot of ways and we ran through a number of questions asked by her and Lord Fox and it is about getting to war fighting readiness.
We cannot have a situation now or in the future where we cannot do what we want to do because we cannot produce the equipment we need at the pace than we need it. We must do better than we have done and part of that is building sovereign capability to do so. We will work with international allies but sovereign capability has been over the past few decades something we have not given as much attention to. The noble Baroness is right and Lord Fox asked as well about the implementation.
A whole chapter dedicated to implementation. Each and every part of that art nature six -- matrixes about being helpful to account. I know that Baroness is right on page 30 as she would have pointed out that there are things yet to be implemented and I will point out that it was published on Monday but we are doing our best to get going. On implementation, I would like to redirect to the implementation team headed by a senior civil servant has been created.
The Chancellor and Defence Secretary, known to Lord Fox, they hold the department to account via defence growth board and the defence industrial joint council will monitor delivery with industry partners. The defence growth board continues to exist in the form I outlined into ensure that these things that are outlined are delivered, which includes working hard to protect jobs with respect to Typhoon. The munitions factory allocated £6 billion for that over the lifetime of Parliament with six additional munitions sites to ensure that we can have munitions.
The investment plan will be part of it. We will see how we can do that. The 10% reduction in the civil service headcount the noble Baroness For all of it, trying to give a greater focus, they are not in addition to the existing bodies, they are going to be bodies that are more directly focused to deliver the outcome that we want. We will substitute to these other bodies and wait to see how that is happening. We have an interim director who will be in post for a period of time whilst we recruit the new director, I am not certain of the exact timetable for that, but she will know that we have an interim director in place.
In terms of defence spending, the amalgamation of that is not smoke and mirrors, it is 20 reflect the reality of the new situation, the new geopolitical context, where we talk about homeland defence, we talk about cyber, the importance of security agencies working with the Armed Forces, the totality of the defence and security of our nation encapsulates all of the above, that is the totality of the spending. The noble Baroness and others can debate whether that is enough, but that is the concept behind joining them together, to give a sense of how much is being spent, both in the sphere.
I know that Lord Beamish is behind us and will know the importance of the work that intelligence does to keep us safe, particularly from a homeland perspective. Lord Fox asked about fast tracking range, -- change, let me give one example, why is it that urgent requirements only operate when there is a war or a crisis? Why can't we bring the same culture, I think the noble Baroness ask this, why can't we bring that same culture... That same attitude, to the situation when it is not a crisis or a war? It is not about being flippant, about disregarding process but rather think, let's get these decisions made, if we can do that, we will do us all a favour, I am happy to meet with the noble Lord, and others, if he wishes, with my colleague, I will volunteer him for it, the procurement Minister, and we can discuss the point he made about offset, this is a really interesting concept, as we go forward, the idea of having mutual benefits, if we buy abroad, how we can ensure that we do not lose any benefit that might accrue, or a complimentary benefit, but I take this point, which is what happens before the system comes into effect, we are going to consult on that, what happens if decisions are made now, I will take some advice on that and talk to the noble Lord and his friends to see what the situation is with respect to that.
He mentioned the issue of skills, skills is a massive issue, if anybody... If anywhere else needs a cultural change, it is trying to ensure that skills-based op occasion, skills- based learning, skills-based opportunities are seen as valuable. If I might say, that has been a problem for decades, the skills option is not seen as much... We are trying to deal with that through the technical colleges, we are going to work with Skills England, the devolved nations, colleges here rather than...
In terms of working with European allies, of course we will, we have got the UK-EU security partnership, I will just say, if this government had not negotiated that, you cannot enter safe without any UK security partnership. The fact that we have got that means the questions means that we can start at them. I think it is an exciting time, I think the noble Baroness and noble Lord for their support, I hope I have answered the questions they asked, it is an exciting time, the defence industry is on the front line with this, if we want to defend moxie, we need to develop our industrial capability as well.
20:51
Lord Bilimoria (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Bilimoria (Crossbench)
The chair of the International Chamber of Commerce in the UK, I am delighted with the strategy. I go back to 2019, we had the anniversary of NATO, I was the only peer in that debate that had when our defence expenditure was two% of GDP, it should be at three%. We are going up to 3.5%, would he agree, sadly, it will probably need to go up to five% soon. The strategy is good but does not talk about global strategy.
Isn't there an opportunity to partner with countries like India, which has a manufacturing as a priority, with our skills and ministers as a co-chair of the APPG, to partner with India, to our benefit as well. The Minister spoke about skills, what about universities? I have seen firsthand the power business and universities working together, in defence, there is a huge possibility. Finally, with Defence Procurement, shouldn't it be compulsory for everyone in Defence Procurement to be qualified through the chartered institute commend and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
supply, headquartered in London. I will take that point back to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I will take that point back to my... Luke Pollard MP, the Minister my... Luke Pollard MP, the Minister in the other place. On defence spending, the debate continues, the spending, the debate continues, the trajectory across Europe is increased spending on defence, of increased spending on defence, of course, there will be a debate about how much that should be. Let me focus on the global strategy. We are working with the Department on a refreshed defence diplomacy strategy, which we will see in due course.
In India specifically, as an course. In India specifically, as an example, we are working, I have got India and spoken to them about the relationship tween our countries, he will note the carrier strike group will note the carrier strike group is visiting on its way back, part of that development of the relationship that development of the relationship between ourselves and other nations, between ourselves and other nations, all of that focused... Every Minister, including myself, whenever Minister, including myself, whenever we go to another country, I am going to the Philippines next week, we put defence exports and business at the forefront of what we do, when it was in Tokyo, a few days ago, defence all over it.
In terms of business. We are making progress, it is supported by everyone, there is more to do but there is an awful lot happening, particularly in countries like India.
Isn't there an opportunity to partner with countries like India, which has a manufacturing as a priority, with our skills and ministers as a co-chair of the APPG, to partner with India, to our benefit as well. The Minister spoke about skills, what about universities? I have seen firsthand the power business and universities working together, in defence, there is a huge possibility. Finally, with Defence Procurement, shouldn't it be compulsory for everyone in Defence Procurement to be qualified through the chartered institute commend and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
supply, headquartered in London. I will take that point back to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I will take that point back to my... Luke Pollard MP, the Minister my... Luke Pollard MP, the Minister in the other place. On defence spending, the debate continues, the spending, the debate continues, the trajectory across Europe is increased spending on defence, of increased spending on defence, of course, there will be a debate about how much that should be. Let me focus on the global strategy. We are working with the Department on a refreshed defence diplomacy strategy, which we will see in due course.
In India specifically, as an course. In India specifically, as an example, we are working, I have got India and spoken to them about the relationship tween our countries, he will note the carrier strike group will note the carrier strike group is visiting on its way back, part of that development of the relationship that development of the relationship between ourselves and other nations, between ourselves and other nations, all of that focused... Every Minister, including myself, whenever Minister, including myself, whenever we go to another country, I am going to the Philippines next week, we put defence exports and business at the forefront of what we do, when it was in Tokyo, a few days ago, defence all over it.
In terms of business. We are making progress, it is supported by everyone, there is more to do but there is an awful lot happening, particularly in countries like India.
20:53
Lord Beamish (Labour)
-
-
Lord Beamish (Labour)
My Lords, can I welcome this strategy, I think it is a first proper defence strategy that we have had since 2005. I agree with Baroness Goldie, what is going to be important is the pace at which it is delivered and I have got to say, my heart sank a little bit when he started reeling off the list of committees to oversee this. Lord Fox is right, we need cultural change, possibly an idea would be to give each civil servant a copy of freedom forged by Arthur Herman that talks about the rearmament of America in the last war.
What assurance can you give that the piece will be there and that regions such as the north- east, which has a proud history of supporting UK Armed Forces, is able to not only respond to it but get investment from the MoD and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
suppliers. I take the point absolutely about
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I take the point absolutely about the need for pace. He will know, the need for pace. He will know, despite the fact that I did list some committees, they will be in place of... The result of the amalgamation of certain committees and bodies, hopefully that some and bodies, hopefully that some reassurance, but I agree about the need for pace, I also thank him for need for pace, I also thank him for his comments about the need for defence jobs and investment, to be not only in the south and south-east not only in the south and south-east but across the regions, he has been a champion of the north-east for a a champion of the north-east for a number of years, he remains and spoken to me about other industries spoken to me about other industries like shipbuilding.
With the defence deals we have seen, in South deals we have seen, in South Yorkshire and Plymouth in England, and then in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, those deals that Northern Ireland, those deals that we see will ensure that investment is taking place across the country and benefit the whole country.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and benefit the whole country. Can I warmly welcome this statement and the intent to create British jobs across the UK and make defence an engine for economic growth, it will come as no surprise, growth, it will come as no surprise, I like the reference of a union of dividend. Can I probe him in it a dividend. Can I probe him in it a bit on how SMEs across the UK, including in Northern Ireland, where including in Northern Ireland, where we have a history of innovation, but also flexibility, how can that be also flexibility, how can that be practically helped to be part of the supply chain in huge announcements supply chain in huge announcements such as one we saw last week, in terms of Norway, how can we help those companies to become part of those companies to become part of the supply chain in those enormous deals, and congratulation on that as well.
What assurance can you give that the piece will be there and that regions such as the north- east, which has a proud history of supporting UK Armed Forces, is able to not only respond to it but get investment from the MoD and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
suppliers. I take the point absolutely about
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I take the point absolutely about the need for pace. He will know, the need for pace. He will know, despite the fact that I did list some committees, they will be in place of... The result of the amalgamation of certain committees and bodies, hopefully that some and bodies, hopefully that some reassurance, but I agree about the need for pace, I also thank him for need for pace, I also thank him for his comments about the need for defence jobs and investment, to be not only in the south and south-east not only in the south and south-east but across the regions, he has been a champion of the north-east for a a champion of the north-east for a number of years, he remains and spoken to me about other industries spoken to me about other industries like shipbuilding.
With the defence deals we have seen, in South deals we have seen, in South Yorkshire and Plymouth in England, and then in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, those deals that Northern Ireland, those deals that we see will ensure that investment is taking place across the country and benefit the whole country.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and benefit the whole country. Can I warmly welcome this statement and the intent to create British jobs across the UK and make defence an engine for economic growth, it will come as no surprise, growth, it will come as no surprise, I like the reference of a union of dividend. Can I probe him in it a dividend. Can I probe him in it a bit on how SMEs across the UK, including in Northern Ireland, where including in Northern Ireland, where we have a history of innovation, but also flexibility, how can that be also flexibility, how can that be practically helped to be part of the supply chain in huge announcements supply chain in huge announcements such as one we saw last week, in terms of Norway, how can we help those companies to become part of those companies to become part of the supply chain in those enormous deals, and congratulation on that as well.
20:56
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
I think the noble Baroness for the comment about the type XXVI success that our country had with respect to the frigates that will be built, it is a massive success for the industry. Can I think the noble Baroness for her efforts with next to small businesses, not only in Northern Ireland but across the UK. I hope she will notice, in the defence industrial strategy, we tried to make sure that all of the regions and the nations of the UK were properly represented and, if I point to one diagram on page 33, the number of jobs in Northern Ireland, total MoD supported industry, civilian and military jobs, 3,300 in Northern Ireland, she is right to point out that we need to make sure it is not only in Northern Ireland that benefits, the importance that it is the SMEs.
We have set up specific bodies to drive small businesses growth and we have also made a commitment to ensure that billions of pounds worth of investment that is being made in the industry, billions of pounds of that money is directed towards Small and medium sized enterprises.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Some the noble Lord will be used to that. I strongly support to that. I strongly support industrial policy, but I think the coupling of defence industrial strategy needs some thought, what it suggests is, industrial policy is
We have set up specific bodies to drive small businesses growth and we have also made a commitment to ensure that billions of pounds worth of investment that is being made in the industry, billions of pounds of that money is directed towards Small and medium sized enterprises.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Some the noble Lord will be used to that. I strongly support to that. I strongly support industrial policy, but I think the coupling of defence industrial strategy needs some thought, what it suggests is, industrial policy is
20:58
Lord Skidelsky (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Skidelsky (Crossbench)
suggests is, industrial policy is driven by military need. Whereas, in fact, the case for industrial policy fact, the case for industrial policy needs to be made apart from that. And to a student of economic history, it is all restless and -- reminiscent born in the Second World War, which then was continued in the Cold War, and was wound down... Only dropped the end of the Cold War. There seems to be a pattern here, what I would like to ask, if he entirely comfortable with racing the case for industrial policy on the need to re-arm? Has developed in the strategic defence review.
What I would say, I support industrial policy but I would not want to hinge my whole argument on the need to rearm because that, itself, is something that needs to be discussed, it can be discussed quite independent of the case for industrial policy.
What I would say, I support industrial policy but I would not want to hinge my whole argument on the need to rearm because that, itself, is something that needs to be discussed, it can be discussed quite independent of the case for industrial policy.
20:59
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
I know that the noble Lord has the opinion that not many agree with him, including myself, but I appreciate the fact that he put in time and time again, in a respectful and intellectual way, and I think he is to be congratulated for that. My augment would be, I think there is a need to rearm, in terms of a defence industrial policy, that policy has to be geared towards the rearmament that needs to take place. I will give one example, this would be an example where I know the noble Lord will disagree, but from my premise, it is really good thing that we are doing to support Ukraine.
As it stands, we were not able... Despite what we are doing, not only ourselves but the European countries, we were not able to support and deliver the equipment necessary for Ukraine to deal with -- do what it wanted to do. I think that is a difficult, if not dangerous, position for ourselves and our allies. And I made this point... Yesterday. When I said, I do not personally, as the defence Minister, as a Minister of state, I do not want to be in a position where I believe we are supporting Ukraine but we read in the papers, going back probably a year, when I read in the paper that Ukraine had to withdraw because they did not have the necessary equipment to continue.
I do not think that is a situation we should be in, part of dealing with that is to develop the defence industry, improve the capability, improve the capacity so we are not in a situation where we
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I draw a attention to my Register
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I draw a attention to my Register of Interests. There is much to welcome in this document but really we need a full day debate on this
As it stands, we were not able... Despite what we are doing, not only ourselves but the European countries, we were not able to support and deliver the equipment necessary for Ukraine to deal with -- do what it wanted to do. I think that is a difficult, if not dangerous, position for ourselves and our allies. And I made this point... Yesterday. When I said, I do not personally, as the defence Minister, as a Minister of state, I do not want to be in a position where I believe we are supporting Ukraine but we read in the papers, going back probably a year, when I read in the paper that Ukraine had to withdraw because they did not have the necessary equipment to continue.
I do not think that is a situation we should be in, part of dealing with that is to develop the defence industry, improve the capability, improve the capacity so we are not in a situation where we
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I draw a attention to my Register
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I draw a attention to my Register of Interests. There is much to welcome in this document but really we need a full day debate on this
21:01
Lord Lee of Trafford (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Lee of Trafford (Liberal Democrat)
we need a full day debate on this and to try to rush everything in 40 minutes or so I think is frankly ridiculous and an insult to the importance of it. There are a small number of specific points or questions would like to put the Minister. First of all, there is no mention in the document -- of the document, and I found this disappointing, of the need to reduce the bloated number of civil servants already employed by the administrative defence and Ministry of Defence, and would ask what plans he's got to streamline defence procurement in terms of personnel.
And second, the very important role of the new national director. It's a massive job, probably going to be one of the most important in the UK. What sort of salary therefore are we talking about to attract one of the top people who might be available? Page 18 of the strategy document on resilience and reducing supply chain vulnerabilities talks about an additional 1.5 billion in, " And always on pipeline for munitions." Could you give me an indication of how that actually is arrived at? And finally, and this hasn't been touched on at all I think, we have these hugely important, hugely important production sites in the UK, like Barrow for example, vital to our national defence.
Is any thought being given to the protection of these key sites? In terms of deployment of anti-missile systems and similar? Because there is nothing I can see in the document
And second, the very important role of the new national director. It's a massive job, probably going to be one of the most important in the UK. What sort of salary therefore are we talking about to attract one of the top people who might be available? Page 18 of the strategy document on resilience and reducing supply chain vulnerabilities talks about an additional 1.5 billion in, " And always on pipeline for munitions." Could you give me an indication of how that actually is arrived at? And finally, and this hasn't been touched on at all I think, we have these hugely important, hugely important production sites in the UK, like Barrow for example, vital to our national defence.
Is any thought being given to the protection of these key sites? In terms of deployment of anti-missile systems and similar? Because there is nothing I can see in the document
21:04
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
about this, and I do think it's something first point with respect something first point with respect to personnel, and the last point with respect to security of sites, although it say to the Noble Lord is although it say to the Noble Lord is of course this isn't the only defence document. So there are defence document. So there are defence documents which are dealing with personnel, what we might do about that. And similarly alongside about that. And similarly alongside that, there are also reviews going on with respect to security of sites.
Partly because of Brize sites. Partly because of Brize Norton but also because we recognise there is a need for investment in there is a need for investment in that, so he will see over the next few months various announcements about the better protection of some sites, not only industrial sites but also military bases as they will also military bases as they will with respect to personnel as well. So that's the any pointer would So that's the any pointer would make. Not every single thing to do with defences in the Defence Industrial Strategy.
On the new National Armaments Director, the director of course only exists director of course only exists because of the National Armaments Director strand or pillar only Director strand or pillar only exists because of the defence reform that we have introduced to create four pillars within the Ministry of Defence, which the armament director is one. He is quite right about the importance. I don't know the exact figure of that. I can look that up and write to him, but is the necessary salary for top and looking at it once and thinking it was a lot of money.
But I'm not sure whether my idea of a lot of money actually is all that, but thought it was appropriate, let's put it that way. Of course. And on the always on pipeline, it's about trying to ensure that we have a situation where we can always make sure if we need to, we can step up our production much more quickly been in a situation than where we have to do this or that. We want an always on pipeline, which essentially is to say we can get the equipment and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
munitions we need quickly. One area where the UK has a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
unique... A very welcome strategy, and I give it full support, at least I give it more support than the theory give it more support than the theory and the proposals. They've been turned into brightly coloured... The
Partly because of Brize sites. Partly because of Brize Norton but also because we recognise there is a need for investment in there is a need for investment in that, so he will see over the next few months various announcements about the better protection of some sites, not only industrial sites but also military bases as they will also military bases as they will with respect to personnel as well. So that's the any pointer would So that's the any pointer would make. Not every single thing to do with defences in the Defence Industrial Strategy.
On the new National Armaments Director, the director of course only exists director of course only exists because of the National Armaments Director strand or pillar only Director strand or pillar only exists because of the defence reform that we have introduced to create four pillars within the Ministry of Defence, which the armament director is one. He is quite right about the importance. I don't know the exact figure of that. I can look that up and write to him, but is the necessary salary for top and looking at it once and thinking it was a lot of money.
But I'm not sure whether my idea of a lot of money actually is all that, but thought it was appropriate, let's put it that way. Of course. And on the always on pipeline, it's about trying to ensure that we have a situation where we can always make sure if we need to, we can step up our production much more quickly been in a situation than where we have to do this or that. We want an always on pipeline, which essentially is to say we can get the equipment and
**** Possible New Speaker ****
munitions we need quickly. One area where the UK has a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
unique... A very welcome strategy, and I give it full support, at least I give it more support than the theory give it more support than the theory and the proposals. They've been turned into brightly coloured... The
21:06
Lord Craig of Radley (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Craig of Radley (Crossbench)
turned into brightly coloured... The problems and delays that we have experienced replacing more stocks which have been passed to the Ukrainians are well known. And underline the need for proper underline the need for proper resupply and resilience. One of the issues which has been announced as the building of six new munitions factories, and I wonder if the Noble Lord is in a position yet to say where they will be and when they will become onstream, and also who is going to meet the cost of setting The state will work with us to support the establishment of these munitions factories.
I'm not in a position to be able to say to the noble and gallant Lords where those six places will be at the moment. That's still a matter for discussion and as far as I'm aware hasn't been resolved yet, but if I'm wrong I will write the Noble Lord and that, as far as unwell as I speak to him this evening, there is no news on exactly where those six places will be. If that's wrong, I will write to the Noble Lord and correct, put the letter in the library to correct the record.
But can I say on a more general point, the Noble Lord has made about initiatives, he's quite right and goes back to the point a number of Noble Lords of made, that we have to be in a situation where we can have, manufacture the equipment we need, manufacture the munitions we need to be in a munitions we need to be in a position where if we need to fight, we can fight because we have sovereign industrial capability to do it. We are not in that situation at the moment.
That's not the place where you need to be, particularly in the current situation and anything about the Industrial Strategy is about ensuring that the UK has that military industrial capability and capacity to do the things it needs to fight the wars it might have to fight, but hopefully as we've said, to know the noble and gallant Lords supports this, that we actually are in a situation by
**** Possible New Speaker ****
preparing for war, we deter war. UK has a unique specialism in de-mining. We are home to the two worlds largest de-mining worlds largest de-mining organisations. It's important that we continue to build on this world leading expertise as an
I'm not in a position to be able to say to the noble and gallant Lords where those six places will be at the moment. That's still a matter for discussion and as far as I'm aware hasn't been resolved yet, but if I'm wrong I will write the Noble Lord and that, as far as unwell as I speak to him this evening, there is no news on exactly where those six places will be. If that's wrong, I will write to the Noble Lord and correct, put the letter in the library to correct the record.
But can I say on a more general point, the Noble Lord has made about initiatives, he's quite right and goes back to the point a number of Noble Lords of made, that we have to be in a situation where we can have, manufacture the equipment we need, manufacture the munitions we need to be in a munitions we need to be in a position where if we need to fight, we can fight because we have sovereign industrial capability to do it. We are not in that situation at the moment.
That's not the place where you need to be, particularly in the current situation and anything about the Industrial Strategy is about ensuring that the UK has that military industrial capability and capacity to do the things it needs to fight the wars it might have to fight, but hopefully as we've said, to know the noble and gallant Lords supports this, that we actually are in a situation by
**** Possible New Speaker ****
preparing for war, we deter war. UK has a unique specialism in de-mining. We are home to the two worlds largest de-mining worlds largest de-mining organisations. It's important that we continue to build on this world leading expertise as an
21:08
Baroness Porter of Fulwood (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Porter of Fulwood (Conservative)
leading expertise as an unprecedented rise in global conflict means they need is never greater. The Noble Lord minister consider what more His Majesty is government can do to uphold and strengthen the U.K.'s commitment to
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the global mine action program? And I thank the noble Baroness
**** Possible New Speaker ****
And I thank the noble Baroness for that question? I've met the Halo trust, and I'm heavily happy to meet trust, and I'm heavily happy to meet them again as well if of any help, but we are very committed to de- but we are very committed to de- mining. We are very committed to all of the various treaties there are of the various treaties there are with respect to this. We are proud with respect to this. We are proud to be at the part of that and proud to pursue the objectives of bodies to pursue the objectives of bodies like the Halo trust to prevent minds like the Halo trust to prevent minds being supported in the first place but also support de-mining first I thank the noble Baroness for thank the noble Baroness for bringing up a subject different to some of the things we've been talking about the hugely important our country and to various other countries around the world.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
countries around the world. I welcome the statement. Just press further on the role of SMEs, press further on the role of SMEs, particularly in their role in defence, innovation and supply chain? Will the government ensure chain? Will the government ensure that the U.K.'s space economy, which is vital for secure communications is vital for secure communications and the situational awareness, is embedded in defence planning and procurement.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Of course I will. He makes a really important point, and again really important point, and again it's another element of an Industrial Strategy. Can I just say on the issue of small businesses, when we launch the Defence when we launch the Defence Industrial Strategy on Monday, I went to Caerphilly to drone went to Caerphilly to drone innovation, which is a small company deliberately to highlight the importance of small businesses and importance of small businesses and the contribution that they make to the security of our country.
So hope
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the global mine action program? And I thank the noble Baroness
**** Possible New Speaker ****
And I thank the noble Baroness for that question? I've met the Halo trust, and I'm heavily happy to meet trust, and I'm heavily happy to meet them again as well if of any help, but we are very committed to de- but we are very committed to de- mining. We are very committed to all of the various treaties there are of the various treaties there are with respect to this. We are proud with respect to this. We are proud to be at the part of that and proud to pursue the objectives of bodies to pursue the objectives of bodies like the Halo trust to prevent minds like the Halo trust to prevent minds being supported in the first place but also support de-mining first I thank the noble Baroness for thank the noble Baroness for bringing up a subject different to some of the things we've been talking about the hugely important our country and to various other countries around the world.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
countries around the world. I welcome the statement. Just press further on the role of SMEs, press further on the role of SMEs, particularly in their role in defence, innovation and supply chain? Will the government ensure chain? Will the government ensure that the U.K.'s space economy, which is vital for secure communications is vital for secure communications and the situational awareness, is embedded in defence planning and procurement.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Of course I will. He makes a really important point, and again really important point, and again it's another element of an Industrial Strategy. Can I just say on the issue of small businesses, when we launch the Defence when we launch the Defence Industrial Strategy on Monday, I went to Caerphilly to drone went to Caerphilly to drone innovation, which is a small company deliberately to highlight the importance of small businesses and importance of small businesses and the contribution that they make to the security of our country.
So hope
21:10
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
-
-
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
the security of our country. So hope that as of some reassurance to the Noble Lord.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
He suggest that campaigns to Michael and target defence firms, particular on university campuses are based on misunderstandings. With the Noble Lord the acknowledge that the campaigns occur in the context the campaigns occur in the context of British arms sales to dubious and worse regimes around the world? worse regimes around the world? Israel of course and the dark shadow of the indescribably awful situation of the indescribably awful situation in Gaza, but also notably for example Saudi Arabia, infamous for example Saudi Arabia, infamous for its internal human rights abuses, on track this year to beat its own track this year to beat its own record of executions, reports 241 to August 5, the slaughter linked to in Yemen, the abuse of women's human Yemen, the abuse of women's human rights.
And yet in the first three months of the Labour government, months of the Labour government, £1.65 billion of arms exports to Saudi Arabia were approved. With the Saudi Arabia were approved. With the Noble Lord agree that there will continue to be resistance while such continue to be resistance while such sales occur?
**** Possible New Speaker ****
sales occur? Let me say this, the general answer to the variety of points the noble Baroness made, of course
**** Possible New Speaker ****
He suggest that campaigns to Michael and target defence firms, particular on university campuses are based on misunderstandings. With the Noble Lord the acknowledge that the campaigns occur in the context the campaigns occur in the context of British arms sales to dubious and worse regimes around the world? worse regimes around the world? Israel of course and the dark shadow of the indescribably awful situation of the indescribably awful situation in Gaza, but also notably for example Saudi Arabia, infamous for example Saudi Arabia, infamous for its internal human rights abuses, on track this year to beat its own track this year to beat its own record of executions, reports 241 to August 5, the slaughter linked to in Yemen, the abuse of women's human Yemen, the abuse of women's human rights.
And yet in the first three months of the Labour government, months of the Labour government, £1.65 billion of arms exports to Saudi Arabia were approved. With the Saudi Arabia were approved. With the Noble Lord agree that there will continue to be resistance while such continue to be resistance while such sales occur?
**** Possible New Speaker ****
sales occur? Let me say this, the general answer to the variety of points the noble Baroness made, of course
21:12
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
-
-
Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)
noble Baroness made, of course people can campaign against what they see as the arms trade. Of course people can campaign against what they see happening in various places across the world. Of course they can campaign about Israel. Of course they can campaign about Saudi Arabia. Of course they can campaign about a whole range of different things. The document says however is that defence industry is a perfectly legitimate way of doing business in the country, and people like me and many others take the view that the stopping of people being able to offer jobs and opportunities to people at universities or in various other trade fairs, the inability of people to do that without fear of intimidation is not right either.
And so it's a dual responsibility. I perfectly accept as long as the noble Baroness conforms to the law or anybody else conforms to the law and is non-violent, they can protest, and they can protest as we saw, although some went beyond, DSE every year, there are protesters for the perfidy entitled to protest as long as they keep to the door, so are people perfectly entitled to go to DSEI to purchase defence weapons, to look and discuss with other people what more might be done to ensure that we have the equipment that we need.
That's the only point I make. There is not a moral certainty on one side of the other here. And that's the point that I want to make and I'm sorry to go on about it because it's the same with respect to whether Armed Forces can go into schools or whether they can at defence fares and all of those things. Of course they should be able to do that. All of those things are really really important. So it's not a case of these people can protest.
They can't. It's about people mutually respecting each other's rights to pursue legitimate activity. So I respect the noble Baronesses right and others to protest against what I stand for and what I say. But I also recognise that I come as many other people do,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
have a right to express the view that I've got as well. Has to begin committee on the
And so it's a dual responsibility. I perfectly accept as long as the noble Baroness conforms to the law or anybody else conforms to the law and is non-violent, they can protest, and they can protest as we saw, although some went beyond, DSE every year, there are protesters for the perfidy entitled to protest as long as they keep to the door, so are people perfectly entitled to go to DSEI to purchase defence weapons, to look and discuss with other people what more might be done to ensure that we have the equipment that we need.
That's the only point I make. There is not a moral certainty on one side of the other here. And that's the point that I want to make and I'm sorry to go on about it because it's the same with respect to whether Armed Forces can go into schools or whether they can at defence fares and all of those things. Of course they should be able to do that. All of those things are really really important. So it's not a case of these people can protest.
They can't. It's about people mutually respecting each other's rights to pursue legitimate activity. So I respect the noble Baronesses right and others to protest against what I stand for and what I say. But I also recognise that I come as many other people do,
**** Possible New Speaker ****
have a right to express the view that I've got as well. Has to begin committee on the
21:14
Legislation: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – committee stage (day 10) - part three
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
schools bill. I beg to move that the House do now again resolved itself into a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
now again resolved itself into a committee upon the bill. Now resolve itself on a committee on the bill. As many as are of that on the bill. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content." The contrary, "Not content." The In clause 49, Amendment 44A. In clause 49, Amendment 44A.
Legislation: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill – committee stage (day 10) - part three
**** Possible New Speaker ****
schools bill. I beg to move that the House do now again resolved itself into a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
now again resolved itself into a committee upon the bill. Now resolve itself on a committee on the bill. As many as are of that on the bill. As many as are of that opinion, say, "Content". Of the contrary, "Not content." The contrary, "Not content." The In clause 49, Amendment 44A. In clause 49, Amendment 44A.
21:15
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
I rise to speak to the amendments relating to clause 49, including my intention that clause 49 should not stand part of the bill. It is of course reasonable for the Secretary of State to direct academies to comply with their legal duties, but this clause goes much further than that and indeed cuts across the Academy funding agreements, which have served the sector well to date. So once again, in a familiar pattern, we start with a question about why this clause is needed.
Where is the evidence that there is nonperformance of the relevant duties? On the part of academies. Or of unreasonable behaviour in relation to either their duties or their powers? Once again, it brings academies in line with local authority maintained schools, despite the fact that they are already significant powers within both the funding agreements and the Academy trust handbook to address Academy trust handbook to address Once again we find the secretary of state at risk of micromanaging instead of delegating responsibility to the trust that run over half our schools and once again we have to ask ourselves, even if it is not the intention of this Secretary of State to interfere in minor matters in our schools, how might a future Secretary of State is these powers? Finally we realised when reading the policy notes that the penalty for non-compliance is first...
I can't remember what it stands for. NTI then a termination warning notice. So the identical powers, sorry a notice to improve and then a termination warning notice. So the identical powers that exist today or in the words of the Minister for the school standards arguing in favour of this course, in committee and the other place that this was using a sledgehammer to crack a NUT. We end up the same sledgehammer for what looks like quite a small not. You could argue that this clause at best just creates another layer of bureaucracy and at worst is a micro manager's charter.
Close reading of the policy notes leaves when asking why yet again. Not only is the Secretary of State taking powers to require a trust that is at risk of not complying with the new policy in the number of branded items of uniform to do so, but also states, sorrow -- sorry also allows that the statehouse should happen. Perhaps the Secretary of State will decide that the trust should remove a branded bookbag or maybe a tie. But I find hard to see how this could be a good use of anyone's time but alone the Secretary of State.
I have a series of amendments that seek to bring back commonsense to the Secretary of State's interventions in these minor breaches, clarity of responsibility and a reminder that the Secretary of State has considerable powers in the funding agreement if needed. My amendment for for a on page 113 of the bill aims to bring some proportionality to the power. It makes it clear that the proprietor must remedy any breach identified under subsection 1 or two within a reasonable period.
Judging what is meant by reasonable period it refers to the nature and seriousness of the pressure -- the breach and the impact of likely impact on people's educational welfare, the complexity of remedial action required and any other relevant circumstances. My new subsection to be clear that the Secretary of State can specify the time. Within which breach or unreasonable behaviour must be addressed. But not the method of doing so. Without this clarification there is a real potential for the power to be used ironically in an unreasonable way.
My amendment 444B removes the ability of the Secretary of State to intervene in the case of a likely breach. It's close to farcical to think of the time and resource and legal advice that would be taken to prepare the letter to a trust with an offending bookbag or tie. The writers of in the thick of it might use this for a future episode. Amendment 444C makes it clear that the powers within the funding agreement should be used to address breaches, 444, sorry we haven't got into the thousands yet although you might by the end of this bill.
Amendment 445 again ensures that any directions from the Secretary of State are limited to the proprietary, statutory duties funding agreement or charity law where there is a breach or unreasonable behaviour in relation to relevant duty. My amendment 445 My amendment 445Z a has the same effect in relation to a situation where the proprietor has acted or is proposing to act unreasonably in relation to the performance of a relevant power. I would just like to apologise that the explanatory statement on that amendment was inaccurate and referred to a duty rather than a power.
Amendment 445ZC and 445 Amendment 445ZC and 445Z the seek to limit again the power of the Secretary of State to a notice rather than a direction so the decision about how to address the breach rests with the proprietor. Surely this is a more practical approach than the one set out in the bill and clearly she needs to be rectified to the Secretary of State satisfaction. We also believe it's important to have visibility on the way that these new powers are used, so our amendment 445Z the at page 113 requires the Secretary of State to make a statement to Parliament when the powers are used explain the issues arising the actions taken.
I appreciate that currently a notice to approve an termination warning notices are published by the Department but that is really only visible to those of us who read the daily emails from the DfE closely. It will not surprise the noble Lady to hear me say that on these benches we think those 49 should not stand part of the bill. It isn't needed, it's disproportionate and it's drafted in a way that doesn't align to the purpose as set out in the policy notes.
My amendments offer governments on ways to improve that alignment, but honestly I think it's best removed altogether. At a time when the Prime Minister is rightly talking about focus on delivery, surely clauses like this that absorb pressures ministerial and official time for little impact should be dropped so the Department can focus on much more pressing issues such as special education send us abilities. I really hope the Minister will
**** Possible New Speaker ****
think again, I beg to move the amendment standing in my name in this group. Amendment proposed, clause 49
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed, clause 49 page 113 leave outlines and insert the words printed on the marshalled
**** Possible New Speaker ****
List. I would like to add my support to amendments for for a 3C, 445 and 445Z a to Z the in the name of 445Z a to Z the in the name of Baroness Barran which seek to rein in the sweeping new powers currently
Where is the evidence that there is nonperformance of the relevant duties? On the part of academies. Or of unreasonable behaviour in relation to either their duties or their powers? Once again, it brings academies in line with local authority maintained schools, despite the fact that they are already significant powers within both the funding agreements and the Academy trust handbook to address Academy trust handbook to address Once again we find the secretary of state at risk of micromanaging instead of delegating responsibility to the trust that run over half our schools and once again we have to ask ourselves, even if it is not the intention of this Secretary of State to interfere in minor matters in our schools, how might a future Secretary of State is these powers? Finally we realised when reading the policy notes that the penalty for non-compliance is first...
I can't remember what it stands for. NTI then a termination warning notice. So the identical powers, sorry a notice to improve and then a termination warning notice. So the identical powers that exist today or in the words of the Minister for the school standards arguing in favour of this course, in committee and the other place that this was using a sledgehammer to crack a NUT. We end up the same sledgehammer for what looks like quite a small not. You could argue that this clause at best just creates another layer of bureaucracy and at worst is a micro manager's charter.
Close reading of the policy notes leaves when asking why yet again. Not only is the Secretary of State taking powers to require a trust that is at risk of not complying with the new policy in the number of branded items of uniform to do so, but also states, sorrow -- sorry also allows that the statehouse should happen. Perhaps the Secretary of State will decide that the trust should remove a branded bookbag or maybe a tie. But I find hard to see how this could be a good use of anyone's time but alone the Secretary of State.
I have a series of amendments that seek to bring back commonsense to the Secretary of State's interventions in these minor breaches, clarity of responsibility and a reminder that the Secretary of State has considerable powers in the funding agreement if needed. My amendment for for a on page 113 of the bill aims to bring some proportionality to the power. It makes it clear that the proprietor must remedy any breach identified under subsection 1 or two within a reasonable period.
Judging what is meant by reasonable period it refers to the nature and seriousness of the pressure -- the breach and the impact of likely impact on people's educational welfare, the complexity of remedial action required and any other relevant circumstances. My new subsection to be clear that the Secretary of State can specify the time. Within which breach or unreasonable behaviour must be addressed. But not the method of doing so. Without this clarification there is a real potential for the power to be used ironically in an unreasonable way.
My amendment 444B removes the ability of the Secretary of State to intervene in the case of a likely breach. It's close to farcical to think of the time and resource and legal advice that would be taken to prepare the letter to a trust with an offending bookbag or tie. The writers of in the thick of it might use this for a future episode. Amendment 444C makes it clear that the powers within the funding agreement should be used to address breaches, 444, sorry we haven't got into the thousands yet although you might by the end of this bill.
Amendment 445 again ensures that any directions from the Secretary of State are limited to the proprietary, statutory duties funding agreement or charity law where there is a breach or unreasonable behaviour in relation to relevant duty. My amendment 445 My amendment 445Z a has the same effect in relation to a situation where the proprietor has acted or is proposing to act unreasonably in relation to the performance of a relevant power. I would just like to apologise that the explanatory statement on that amendment was inaccurate and referred to a duty rather than a power.
Amendment 445ZC and 445 Amendment 445ZC and 445Z the seek to limit again the power of the Secretary of State to a notice rather than a direction so the decision about how to address the breach rests with the proprietor. Surely this is a more practical approach than the one set out in the bill and clearly she needs to be rectified to the Secretary of State satisfaction. We also believe it's important to have visibility on the way that these new powers are used, so our amendment 445Z the at page 113 requires the Secretary of State to make a statement to Parliament when the powers are used explain the issues arising the actions taken.
I appreciate that currently a notice to approve an termination warning notices are published by the Department but that is really only visible to those of us who read the daily emails from the DfE closely. It will not surprise the noble Lady to hear me say that on these benches we think those 49 should not stand part of the bill. It isn't needed, it's disproportionate and it's drafted in a way that doesn't align to the purpose as set out in the policy notes.
My amendments offer governments on ways to improve that alignment, but honestly I think it's best removed altogether. At a time when the Prime Minister is rightly talking about focus on delivery, surely clauses like this that absorb pressures ministerial and official time for little impact should be dropped so the Department can focus on much more pressing issues such as special education send us abilities. I really hope the Minister will
**** Possible New Speaker ****
think again, I beg to move the amendment standing in my name in this group. Amendment proposed, clause 49
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Amendment proposed, clause 49 page 113 leave outlines and insert the words printed on the marshalled
**** Possible New Speaker ****
List. I would like to add my support to amendments for for a 3C, 445 and 445Z a to Z the in the name of 445Z a to Z the in the name of Baroness Barran which seek to rein in the sweeping new powers currently
21:23
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Conservative)
in the sweeping new powers currently set out in clause 49 for the Secretary of State to intervene in academy operations. As my noble friend said of course Secretary of State should have the ability to ensure that academies comply with their statutory duties the powers currently included in clause 49 are so broad they will undermine trust and school leaders significantly reduced academy autonomy and create a top-down bureaucracy with potentially over restrictive government insight. The clauses currently drafted for instance allow for the Secretary of State to give directions they consider appropriate to academies, if they are deemed to have acted unreasonably or be proposing to act unreasonably.
To my mind the effect appears to be that a trust could be punished for action is not yet taken with the central direction initiated simply on the basis of speculation from a Secretary of State. I may have misunderstood but if this is the case that surely copyright. In this context the use of the word unreasonably is a further cause for concern. It's a vague and subjective standard, it's left undefined in clause 49 as a stand and it doesn't open the door to overreach and potential political interference in individual schools and trusts from Whitehall.
Without clear guardrails it would enable members to meddle in decisions that surely must properly belong to Academy trustees and Head Teachers. As my noble friend is just say saddened opening remark the drafting of the clause runs the risk of creating a micromanager's charter. The problem doesn't end there, the powers granted under clause 49 are not only overly broad, but they also unchecked and have no independent review Ward appeal mechanisms Elton. Something which amendment 45 a table by Lord Knight was specifically addressing.
The group amendment tabled by my noble friend Auden along with Lord Knight's amendment would need might bring much needed balance to clause 49 by restoring proportionality and fairness into the process while maintaining the Secretary of State's powers to ensure that trusts to breach their statutory duties, funding agreements or charity law. I would hope the Minister will think again about the breath of powers
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that the governance is proposing. I'm also rising to support the amendments proposed by Baroness Barran, as she and Baroness Evans Barran, as she and Baroness Evans have pointed out, is once again not simply obvious why these are needed.
To my mind the effect appears to be that a trust could be punished for action is not yet taken with the central direction initiated simply on the basis of speculation from a Secretary of State. I may have misunderstood but if this is the case that surely copyright. In this context the use of the word unreasonably is a further cause for concern. It's a vague and subjective standard, it's left undefined in clause 49 as a stand and it doesn't open the door to overreach and potential political interference in individual schools and trusts from Whitehall.
Without clear guardrails it would enable members to meddle in decisions that surely must properly belong to Academy trustees and Head Teachers. As my noble friend is just say saddened opening remark the drafting of the clause runs the risk of creating a micromanager's charter. The problem doesn't end there, the powers granted under clause 49 are not only overly broad, but they also unchecked and have no independent review Ward appeal mechanisms Elton. Something which amendment 45 a table by Lord Knight was specifically addressing.
The group amendment tabled by my noble friend Auden along with Lord Knight's amendment would need might bring much needed balance to clause 49 by restoring proportionality and fairness into the process while maintaining the Secretary of State's powers to ensure that trusts to breach their statutory duties, funding agreements or charity law. I would hope the Minister will think again about the breath of powers
**** Possible New Speaker ****
that the governance is proposing. I'm also rising to support the amendments proposed by Baroness Barran, as she and Baroness Evans Barran, as she and Baroness Evans have pointed out, is once again not simply obvious why these are needed.
21:25
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
simply obvious why these are needed. The existing legislative framework and funding agreements provide ample levers to enforce and hold Academy trust accountable. If there is an implied shift as there appears to be away from accountability towards direct control and management, I think it's important to remember what we heard from Lord Blunkett earlier in this afternoon. He laid out very clearly those underlying principles about high autonomy balanced with strong accountability and referred to the problems and wreak weaknesses of some local authorities which made it necessary and desirable to move to the model that served us well for many years.
It would be deeply unfortunate if we end up with the central government that is attempting to manage the entire school system rather than along the lines of one of the weaker local authorities 40 years ago. I'm genuinely worried about the strain this would place in the Civil Service and I have concerns about people trying to read tea leaves and decide whether a breach is likely. It feels to me as others have said like a system that is almost certain to create more contention in disagreement and more time wasted on legal disputes, challenges to action than it is to help children by resolving problems early.
I wish to support set of amendments proposed by Baroness Barran.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to speak to support Baroness Barran's amendment, I
It would be deeply unfortunate if we end up with the central government that is attempting to manage the entire school system rather than along the lines of one of the weaker local authorities 40 years ago. I'm genuinely worried about the strain this would place in the Civil Service and I have concerns about people trying to read tea leaves and decide whether a breach is likely. It feels to me as others have said like a system that is almost certain to create more contention in disagreement and more time wasted on legal disputes, challenges to action than it is to help children by resolving problems early.
I wish to support set of amendments proposed by Baroness Barran.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I rise to speak to support Baroness Barran's amendment, I
21:27
Lord Leigh of Hurley (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Leigh of Hurley (Conservative)
haven't spoken in the Committee stage and I apologise I wasn't available speaker Second Reading and although I supported much of the arguments earlier on today in respect of teachers qualification and curriculums and so on I thought I would choose to speak on this group of amendments today because it seems to me they, these clause go the whole effort -- essence of the Academy and indeed the clauses negate much of what Academy is all about and what it wishes to do.
So the amendments I suggest are particularly important and this is a bit disappointing that there are so few of us loyal troopers in the chamber here tonight to address this extremely important issue about the heart or core of how academies are run. Indeed I will disclose my interest in the second but I was propelled to speak because I heard from one sponsor he told me that if these clauses come through, he would want to hand his Academy as he calls it, the Academy, the sponsors back to the state.
I can't believe that is what the government wants to achieve. But the inclusion of clause 45 may well lead to that and that would be a tragedy for our children's education. I'm a huge admirer of the academies, can I remind your Lordships that I was a trustee of the London Academy in Edgware and I am currently a member of the Lee Academy trust intent, member is a peculiar status within an academy but that is what I am. Not a governor or a trustee with the county council I'm a member.
Thus why mention was London Academy in Edgware was one of the original sponsored academies, it replaced failing school in Edgware and it was sponsored by the philanthropist in 2023 and in 2023 thanks to in no small part the excellent head Paddy McGrath it became among the top 55 schools in the country. Importantly over 50% of the students are eligible for the pupil premium and the admission policy prioritise students eligible for free school meals. This was a fantastic achievement.
How has it been obtained? Well not least because of the flexibility is that it has been afforded and the freedoms which have been granted to it by its Academy status. The other school were mentioned among member along with the county council is the Lee Academy trust. That has grown under the leadership of Simon Beamish and Frank Green from one of the original CDCs who some may remember, for full disclosure was originally sponsored in the '80s by my uncle Sir Geoffrey Lee and is now an MAT of over 30 schools.
It is widely respected for its tremendous achievements. I know Lord Baker who is instrumental in its creation and deed Baroness Barran visited the school recently and has been hugely supportive and recognised the incredible challenges it faced not least with schools for example in the Shipley Island chaplain described as one of the worst schools in the country when taken over by the Lee Academy trust, it is now making tremendous it is now making tremendous So anyone who's watched the hugely impressive growth has to recognise their successes, and that includes the Secretary of State for Defence herself of course he said in the Commons on 8 January, " Academies introduced by the last Labour government and expanded by the Conservative Party have been instrumental in raising standards in our school system.
they have delivered brilliant results particular for the most disadvantaged children." Socially we don't want to destroy this successful stop as Sir John Coles, CEO of United learning has said, " I worry about some provisions in the bill are really just a concern that in future we might be prevented from doing things that we do that we know are effective. And he's right. Clause 49 is so wide-ranging and frankly threatening that we really need to look at it again. The bill has been brought in without a white paper, so it's the real scrutiny in this chamber and this House that will hopefully allow the bill to be improved and amended.
So one very much hopes that the Labour frontbench will listen to the incredible expertise, excluding myself in this chamber on the subject. The white power gives the secretary of state to intervene implies that there is no trust in the professionals to run the academies. Whereas we know the reverse is true. As the CEO of the Confederation schools trust has said, the power is too wide for the issue be limited to statutory guidance, the provisions in the funding agreement, and charity law.
I was astonished to read a very recent article in the Spectator which reveals this active state was asked to name any school that was not an Academy which is raising its standard. She didn't. She couldn't. I'm sure there are some,... Well I'm only repeating what was in print. I didn't know why. But clearly when one looks at the academies, one sees the tremendous success and improvement to education the benefits children in these in this country.
Control of schools in this country but the government is not the answer. So hope the government listens to my Noble Friend his dedication to this sector I salute dedication to this sector I salute
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and agree with her amendments. I really don't want to prolong the debate, but I just have two
So the amendments I suggest are particularly important and this is a bit disappointing that there are so few of us loyal troopers in the chamber here tonight to address this extremely important issue about the heart or core of how academies are run. Indeed I will disclose my interest in the second but I was propelled to speak because I heard from one sponsor he told me that if these clauses come through, he would want to hand his Academy as he calls it, the Academy, the sponsors back to the state.
I can't believe that is what the government wants to achieve. But the inclusion of clause 45 may well lead to that and that would be a tragedy for our children's education. I'm a huge admirer of the academies, can I remind your Lordships that I was a trustee of the London Academy in Edgware and I am currently a member of the Lee Academy trust intent, member is a peculiar status within an academy but that is what I am. Not a governor or a trustee with the county council I'm a member.
Thus why mention was London Academy in Edgware was one of the original sponsored academies, it replaced failing school in Edgware and it was sponsored by the philanthropist in 2023 and in 2023 thanks to in no small part the excellent head Paddy McGrath it became among the top 55 schools in the country. Importantly over 50% of the students are eligible for the pupil premium and the admission policy prioritise students eligible for free school meals. This was a fantastic achievement.
How has it been obtained? Well not least because of the flexibility is that it has been afforded and the freedoms which have been granted to it by its Academy status. The other school were mentioned among member along with the county council is the Lee Academy trust. That has grown under the leadership of Simon Beamish and Frank Green from one of the original CDCs who some may remember, for full disclosure was originally sponsored in the '80s by my uncle Sir Geoffrey Lee and is now an MAT of over 30 schools.
It is widely respected for its tremendous achievements. I know Lord Baker who is instrumental in its creation and deed Baroness Barran visited the school recently and has been hugely supportive and recognised the incredible challenges it faced not least with schools for example in the Shipley Island chaplain described as one of the worst schools in the country when taken over by the Lee Academy trust, it is now making tremendous it is now making tremendous So anyone who's watched the hugely impressive growth has to recognise their successes, and that includes the Secretary of State for Defence herself of course he said in the Commons on 8 January, " Academies introduced by the last Labour government and expanded by the Conservative Party have been instrumental in raising standards in our school system.
they have delivered brilliant results particular for the most disadvantaged children." Socially we don't want to destroy this successful stop as Sir John Coles, CEO of United learning has said, " I worry about some provisions in the bill are really just a concern that in future we might be prevented from doing things that we do that we know are effective. And he's right. Clause 49 is so wide-ranging and frankly threatening that we really need to look at it again. The bill has been brought in without a white paper, so it's the real scrutiny in this chamber and this House that will hopefully allow the bill to be improved and amended.
So one very much hopes that the Labour frontbench will listen to the incredible expertise, excluding myself in this chamber on the subject. The white power gives the secretary of state to intervene implies that there is no trust in the professionals to run the academies. Whereas we know the reverse is true. As the CEO of the Confederation schools trust has said, the power is too wide for the issue be limited to statutory guidance, the provisions in the funding agreement, and charity law.
I was astonished to read a very recent article in the Spectator which reveals this active state was asked to name any school that was not an Academy which is raising its standard. She didn't. She couldn't. I'm sure there are some,... Well I'm only repeating what was in print. I didn't know why. But clearly when one looks at the academies, one sees the tremendous success and improvement to education the benefits children in these in this country.
Control of schools in this country but the government is not the answer. So hope the government listens to my Noble Friend his dedication to this sector I salute dedication to this sector I salute
**** Possible New Speaker ****
and agree with her amendments. I really don't want to prolong the debate, but I just have two
21:33
Baroness Bousted (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Bousted (Labour)
the debate, but I just have two answer that charge that it is simply the academies which are improving standards of education and maintained schools aren't. The research in the area just doesn't show that to be the case. So educational policy Institute does a yearly look at the performance of academies and state schools. It's done that since 2017 I think. One for this year, I had a look at it last week, the exact figures but the general conclusion is the same as every year that there are some very very good academy chains and there are some poor academy chains.
There are some very very good maintained schools, and there are some doing less well. And when you look at the results in the round, there is no premium overall for the Academy sector. Now you can shake your head, but I will happily write to you with the research position. So I don't want to prolong things, but I just couldn't sit there and take that remark again. I thought we discussed it over dinner, and now I'm saying it in the House so it's on the record.
It is simply untrue to say that there is one sector of schools where there is all the improvement and there is another... Because they all schools, maintained schools where there is no improvement. Just simply isn't the case, and the evidence in the research simply doesn't support that. doesn't support that.
There are some very very good maintained schools, and there are some doing less well. And when you look at the results in the round, there is no premium overall for the Academy sector. Now you can shake your head, but I will happily write to you with the research position. So I don't want to prolong things, but I just couldn't sit there and take that remark again. I thought we discussed it over dinner, and now I'm saying it in the House so it's on the record.
It is simply untrue to say that there is one sector of schools where there is all the improvement and there is another... Because they all schools, maintained schools where there is no improvement. Just simply isn't the case, and the evidence in the research simply doesn't support that. doesn't support that.
21:35
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
I rise briefly to talk generally about all these amendments, which I and my party are not supporting. I sort of was there at the beginning, sorry, I ought to declare an interest as a governor of the Kings Academy Liverpool. I was there at the beginning when academies were first of all started for a particular reason by the then Labour government in very deprived communities and was then seized upon by the coalition government, including David laws from my party.
And we would sit through endless meetings, and it was always attacks on the main sector and how incredible academies are. And in those early days and even quite recently I never heard Lord Nash was not in his usual place incredible academies are. And in those early days and even quite recently I never heard Lord Nash was not in His Usual Pl, Lord Agnew actually say this Academy is doing a really good job. Guess what? This maintained school is doing a really good job.
I never ever heard any criticism of -- of any other Academy. And people can shake their heads but if you look at the record, that was the case. I remember us pushing for example to say that we should actually inspect multi-academies themselves. No, couldn't do that. I remember trying to suggest that we actually look, we have an external look at the finances of multi-academy trusts. We can't do that. Thank goodness we've moved on considerably since those days, and I pay tribute to Baroness Barran because during her time as education minister she went to visit maintained schools, and her language and the language of her party has changed considerably.
And I very much appreciate that. But if something, if there is a breach, and I personally am not sure what the breaches, how serious they are or how weak they are. The Secretary of State is the person who should be looking at those and making final decisions. It shouldn't be just left to the Academy or the multi-academy trust themselves. One recalls that panorama documentary about how proprietors of academies for ensuring that some of the work, and this was a limited number, thank goodness, some of the work there academies was going to the companies they actually owned.
So a repair, a construction company would get the work from that academy. Wouldn't go out for tender. There was a big scandal and panorama about it. Now if that's wrong, then action needs to be taken. I don't know what these breaches are. How serious these breaches are. How wide these breaches are, but it shouldn't be just left to the Academy to sort out. It should be sorted out by the Secretary of State and by her minister in the House of Lords.
And we would sit through endless meetings, and it was always attacks on the main sector and how incredible academies are. And in those early days and even quite recently I never heard Lord Nash was not in his usual place incredible academies are. And in those early days and even quite recently I never heard Lord Nash was not in His Usual Pl, Lord Agnew actually say this Academy is doing a really good job. Guess what? This maintained school is doing a really good job.
I never ever heard any criticism of -- of any other Academy. And people can shake their heads but if you look at the record, that was the case. I remember us pushing for example to say that we should actually inspect multi-academies themselves. No, couldn't do that. I remember trying to suggest that we actually look, we have an external look at the finances of multi-academy trusts. We can't do that. Thank goodness we've moved on considerably since those days, and I pay tribute to Baroness Barran because during her time as education minister she went to visit maintained schools, and her language and the language of her party has changed considerably.
And I very much appreciate that. But if something, if there is a breach, and I personally am not sure what the breaches, how serious they are or how weak they are. The Secretary of State is the person who should be looking at those and making final decisions. It shouldn't be just left to the Academy or the multi-academy trust themselves. One recalls that panorama documentary about how proprietors of academies for ensuring that some of the work, and this was a limited number, thank goodness, some of the work there academies was going to the companies they actually owned.
So a repair, a construction company would get the work from that academy. Wouldn't go out for tender. There was a big scandal and panorama about it. Now if that's wrong, then action needs to be taken. I don't know what these breaches are. How serious these breaches are. How wide these breaches are, but it shouldn't be just left to the Academy to sort out. It should be sorted out by the Secretary of State and by her minister in the House of Lords.
21:38
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
Turning to the amendments in group 9 tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran, just before I get into the detail of the clause and the amendments, can I just say to the noble Lady that we believe that she may have been reading from an old version of the policy notes. Because they were updated when they came to the House of Lords. And the policy notes are therefore correct in relation to the items she was talking about.
But if she wants to check that's the case and drop me a line, I be more than happy to follow that up if that isn't the case. This that up if that isn't the case. This group covers the clauses relating to ensure, the clause related to ensuring effective oversight and accountability of Academy trusts. Clause 49 introduces a power for the Secretary of State to issue a direction to an Academy trust where they are failing to comply with their legal duties or acting unreasonably when exercising these powers.
Currently when a trust is in breach of a legal duty, the Secretary of State can only issue a termination warning notice, which may be disproportionate for significant but isolated breaches. This measure will allow the Secretary of State to direct Academy trusts to ensure they meet their legal responsibilities and to address instances of unreasonable conduct where necessary. It physically and proportionate route to ensure compliance. If a trust does not respond to a direction, the secretary of state may apply to the courts to ensure the matter is resolved, reflecting similar powers already in place the maintained schools.
This will be used where appropriate to help implement key provisions in the bill, such as those relating to curriculum admissions and uniform if necessary. Most Academy trusts perform well, and to meet their legal obligations. However where the foreshore, the government must be able to act in a targeted and proportionate way. Clause 49 allows for early engagement, proportionate intervention, and enforcement through the courts. Only when through the courts. Only when necessary. Turning to amendment 445.ZB tabled by the noble Lady, which proposes a statutory requirement for an annual statement to Parliament on the use of this power, the government is of course fully in favour of transparency, but already publishers directions and other notices on Gov.UK in a timely and detailed manner, and I want to just put on record the government's commitment to maintaining this approach to transparency.
An annual report would duplicate this process and at no further value while adding an unnecessary administrative burden turning out to amendments 444.A, 445.ZC and 445.ZD all in the name of the noble Lady, which proposes replacing the sector of states direction making power with a notice procedure, these amendments replace the government's clear and authoritative direction making power with a more convoluted system of self policing duties and notice procedure. In practice it risks delaying intervention. Effective oversight can rely on a category trust policing themselves.
The Secretary of State must retain the ability to act swiftly and decisively when serious concerns arise. Particular where trust failed to meet their legal obligations or acting reasonably when exercising those duties. The notice procedure is very similar to the power as drafted, except it does not include the ability to issue a direction in cases of unreasonable exercise of a power. Therefore the clause as drafted is more effective than the proposed notice procedure. When the Secretary of state rights to the trust before outlining direction, it will outline the breach and suggested actions to remedy the breach and seek representations.
Finally in this group, amendments 45, 445.B, C and 45.ZA tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran seek to limit the scope of clause 49. These amendments proposed to restrict the Secretary of State's ability to issue directions to cases where a specific legal duty has been breached. In doing so, they would remove the ability to intervene where trust acts or proposes to act unreasonably in the exercise of its powers. Even if no explicit duty has been contravened. These would narrow the intended breach of the -- breach of the clause.
The government's intention is to make sure the government's intention, not only when there is a breach of duty but also when it's manifestly unreasonable. However, I've heard concerns raised by Noble Lords about this clause. In particular the concerns that these amendments seek to address with regard to the broad scope of the clause. I am considering potential solutions that would reserve our ability to intervene effectively while respecting the autonomy of trusts. And I look forward to bringing a solution back at report stage that addresses these concerns.
And on that basis, I hope Noble Lords will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
But if she wants to check that's the case and drop me a line, I be more than happy to follow that up if that isn't the case. This that up if that isn't the case. This group covers the clauses relating to ensure, the clause related to ensuring effective oversight and accountability of Academy trusts. Clause 49 introduces a power for the Secretary of State to issue a direction to an Academy trust where they are failing to comply with their legal duties or acting unreasonably when exercising these powers.
Currently when a trust is in breach of a legal duty, the Secretary of State can only issue a termination warning notice, which may be disproportionate for significant but isolated breaches. This measure will allow the Secretary of State to direct Academy trusts to ensure they meet their legal responsibilities and to address instances of unreasonable conduct where necessary. It physically and proportionate route to ensure compliance. If a trust does not respond to a direction, the secretary of state may apply to the courts to ensure the matter is resolved, reflecting similar powers already in place the maintained schools.
This will be used where appropriate to help implement key provisions in the bill, such as those relating to curriculum admissions and uniform if necessary. Most Academy trusts perform well, and to meet their legal obligations. However where the foreshore, the government must be able to act in a targeted and proportionate way. Clause 49 allows for early engagement, proportionate intervention, and enforcement through the courts. Only when through the courts. Only when necessary. Turning to amendment 445.ZB tabled by the noble Lady, which proposes a statutory requirement for an annual statement to Parliament on the use of this power, the government is of course fully in favour of transparency, but already publishers directions and other notices on Gov.UK in a timely and detailed manner, and I want to just put on record the government's commitment to maintaining this approach to transparency.
An annual report would duplicate this process and at no further value while adding an unnecessary administrative burden turning out to amendments 444.A, 445.ZC and 445.ZD all in the name of the noble Lady, which proposes replacing the sector of states direction making power with a notice procedure, these amendments replace the government's clear and authoritative direction making power with a more convoluted system of self policing duties and notice procedure. In practice it risks delaying intervention. Effective oversight can rely on a category trust policing themselves.
The Secretary of State must retain the ability to act swiftly and decisively when serious concerns arise. Particular where trust failed to meet their legal obligations or acting reasonably when exercising those duties. The notice procedure is very similar to the power as drafted, except it does not include the ability to issue a direction in cases of unreasonable exercise of a power. Therefore the clause as drafted is more effective than the proposed notice procedure. When the Secretary of state rights to the trust before outlining direction, it will outline the breach and suggested actions to remedy the breach and seek representations.
Finally in this group, amendments 45, 445.B, C and 45.ZA tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran seek to limit the scope of clause 49. These amendments proposed to restrict the Secretary of State's ability to issue directions to cases where a specific legal duty has been breached. In doing so, they would remove the ability to intervene where trust acts or proposes to act unreasonably in the exercise of its powers. Even if no explicit duty has been contravened. These would narrow the intended breach of the -- breach of the clause.
The government's intention is to make sure the government's intention, not only when there is a breach of duty but also when it's manifestly unreasonable. However, I've heard concerns raised by Noble Lords about this clause. In particular the concerns that these amendments seek to address with regard to the broad scope of the clause. I am considering potential solutions that would reserve our ability to intervene effectively while respecting the autonomy of trusts. And I look forward to bringing a solution back at report stage that addresses these concerns.
And on that basis, I hope Noble Lords will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
21:44
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
We've had to raise of sunshine in one day. We should celebrate at this late hour. We now know how to wear the noble Baroness the Minister down. We will be starting at 9 AM next week. But in all seriousness, the noble Lady can hear I am extremely grateful. It's not just tiredness. I think there are some issues with this clause so I won't belabour those, but just welcome very much her closing remarks. I just wanted to thank my Noble Friends Baroness Evans and Baroness Spielman and the Noble Lords Lord Lee for their contributions and to note as the Noble Lords Lord Lee has said, thanks to the Lee academies trust for taking on part of what was a very troubled school on the Isle of Sheppey, which is a particularly challenging community.
And we wish the trust every success and the In relation to Lord Storey's remarks, I really hope there was a misunderstanding I was absolutely not suggesting that if they trust breaches its duties -- a trust, then it should be left to the trust themselves, what I was trying to set out obviously not clearly enough was that there are already considerable powers that the Secretary of State holds through the funding agreement and through the Academy trust handbook which mean that those breaches can be addressed and I have got the original Commons version of the policy document in honour of Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle I was trying to save the planet by -- by not printing another one, so unless the examples have changed, but the examples given in that document were a trust school uniform policy not conforming to the new school uniform requirements and the trust has failed to follow its own complaints process, I think noble Lord will agree with me that neither of those things are so earthshattering in their seriousness.
Compared to some of the things that can happen in schools, just enclosing and maybe Baroness and I need to have a longer conversation about this, I absolutely agree with her that the average trust and the average Academy and the average maintained school show very similar outcomes but I think there are two things which are worth reflecting on. The first is as the noble Lady understands extremely well, most of the very challenging schools, about 23% of our secondaries sponsored academies, so within that Academy school pool we got some very deprived and challenge communities and some challenging schools with staffing issues and all the things the noble Lady understands better than I do, the second thing that if you look at the distribution of those results and particularly if you look at single Academy trusts the very highest performing schools in the country sits at the top end of academies and the very lowest performing, and I think that's a bit of my frustration with the bell, the government should if I may just be focusing on how do we learn from the top end whether they are maintained, we're going to go back to older men a minute, or academies, and how do we address that failure which was behind my early amendment in regards to interventions.
We just felt it was important to add that to the noble ladies remarks but with deep thanks to the Minister for her encouraging remarks. I beg leave withdraw to my amendment.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Your Ministers pleasure that this amendment is withdrawn? Amendment is withdrawn. Amendment for fourth the withdrawn. Amendment for fourth the 2445Z the 2445ZD not moved. Amendment 45 a Lord Knight not moved. The question is that clause 49 stand part of the bill. As many 49 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. We come now to clause 50 amendment 445B Baroness Barran.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Barran. I'm optimistic for a hat-trick from the noble Baroness the from the noble Baroness the Minister. Clause 50 is one of the Minister. Clause 50 is one of the clauses which leaves me most worried about the bill because I think it's about the bill because I think it's the one that risks directly damaging the education that children receive and again, that is obviously not what ministers intend, but it does appear to ignore the impact on school performance of sponsored academies.
Again, to be clear, not academies. Again, to be clear, not every single sponsored Academy, but overall I know that the Minister overall I know that the Minister will agree that the evidence shows really important impact and important impact on the lives of children in those schools. To be clear, I don't think anyone on my benches thinks that autonomy is a magic alert to solve the problems of any school whether it's failing or not, the key is how that autonomy is used.
Some MAT's have used their autonomy to focus on developing really great and deep expertise in turning around struggling schools, supporting staff and transforming outcomes for pupils. Others have focused on developing great curricula and of course there is lots of other examples and of course there are examples of professional generosity in the maintained sector as well. There are now 2796 sponsored academies in England, over 23% of our secondary schools. As we have heard from a number of your Lordships including Lords you earlier -- Lords Sewel, trusts have led to extraordinary turnarounds in some of the most difficult schools in our country and I pay tribute to everyone who is involved in that critical work.
But clause 50 changes that, no longer will a failing maintained schools automatically join a strong MAT, in her written ministerial statement published yesterday the Secretary of State wrote and I quote, subject to the passage of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, structural intervention through issuing of Academy orders will continue to be the default approach the schools and special measures because no child should be left in a school that does not have the capacity to improve. I am genuinely confused by that because I don't feel that is what the bill says, as it removes the section in the academies act 2010 which facilitated this intervention and I hope the noble Lady can explain and reassure me.
The government has argued that we should intervene earlier in schools that are struggling and nobody would disagree with that, we are already doing that in the Department when I was in office and of course if that works, that's the best outcome for children. The other argument that government has put forward is that directive Academy orders are too slow, but I think if the Minister has time to dig into the detail she will agree with me that the ones that are slow are really complicated, they either need significant financial help which the department is struggling to find department is struggling to find down the back of any education sofa, which might be in relation to capital or might be in relation to revenue, or there are very complex governance issues or in one case I can remember which was very slow there are tripling PFI contracts -- tripling -- crippling.
Even that doesn't stop immediate helping put in and the Minister will be familiar with a number of cases where this has happened often the trust taking considerable risks and commitment of resources without any guarantee they will end up being the sponsor for the school. They do it because it's the right thing to do. My amendment 445B aims to address the government's concern about delays but still keeping the urgency necessary to address the weaknesses in a particular school. So if no suitable responses available the Secretary of State has published the plan within 14 days setting out how she will support appropriate governance and leadership and rapid improvement.
This brings about the clarity and transparency that will be crucial to retain the confidence of parents, pupils and staff. I think that aligns with the Secretary of State's statement yesterday but if it doesn't I hope the Minister can explain where the gap is. Amendment 44 6 AM is to address a problem which is very likely to emerge as a result of the government's approach, namely an increase to the number of judicial reviews of Academy orders. Schools want to understand why they are not being given more support or more time to turnarounds, however valid any individual case might be, the outcome will be a slowing down and reduction in the use of Academy orders leaving pupils in failing schools for longer.
My amendment 446B aims to reintroduce the automatic Academy of those maintained schools that have either received a significant improvement judgement from OFSTED or whatever the latest languages, or however the Department and the chief inspector judge that to be framed. And where the rise teams believe that the school is significantly underperforming. The bill also fails to address another problem, those also under the previous OFSTED framework were repeatedly graded as requiring important -- improvement, some as many as seven times or more.
None of us in this House want our child to attend or work in a school that is so stuck in a rut of underperformance, and I know the decision to intervene in the so- called to RIPA schools and the secret language of school intervention was not universally welcomed including by Baroness Spielman, she and I debated this many times in her previous role, but the aim was to send a strong signal about the priority we put on addressing underperformance in a timely and effective way, and sadly the Secretary of State reversed this approach very early on in her tenure.
But again I would ask the Minister to reconsider whether this clause should stand part of the bill particularly given the Secretary of State's comments yesterday, where is the evidence that apartments propose to approach would be more effective? Children in failing schools need urgent action is the Secretary of State herself has said and sometimes the leadership of that school does not want to become part of a trust, but ultimately we need to be clear that the trust of the pupils must always come for first.
I beg to move
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the amendment than you my name in the clause. Men propose clause 50 page 1 more
And we wish the trust every success and the In relation to Lord Storey's remarks, I really hope there was a misunderstanding I was absolutely not suggesting that if they trust breaches its duties -- a trust, then it should be left to the trust themselves, what I was trying to set out obviously not clearly enough was that there are already considerable powers that the Secretary of State holds through the funding agreement and through the Academy trust handbook which mean that those breaches can be addressed and I have got the original Commons version of the policy document in honour of Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle I was trying to save the planet by -- by not printing another one, so unless the examples have changed, but the examples given in that document were a trust school uniform policy not conforming to the new school uniform requirements and the trust has failed to follow its own complaints process, I think noble Lord will agree with me that neither of those things are so earthshattering in their seriousness.
Compared to some of the things that can happen in schools, just enclosing and maybe Baroness and I need to have a longer conversation about this, I absolutely agree with her that the average trust and the average Academy and the average maintained school show very similar outcomes but I think there are two things which are worth reflecting on. The first is as the noble Lady understands extremely well, most of the very challenging schools, about 23% of our secondaries sponsored academies, so within that Academy school pool we got some very deprived and challenge communities and some challenging schools with staffing issues and all the things the noble Lady understands better than I do, the second thing that if you look at the distribution of those results and particularly if you look at single Academy trusts the very highest performing schools in the country sits at the top end of academies and the very lowest performing, and I think that's a bit of my frustration with the bell, the government should if I may just be focusing on how do we learn from the top end whether they are maintained, we're going to go back to older men a minute, or academies, and how do we address that failure which was behind my early amendment in regards to interventions.
We just felt it was important to add that to the noble ladies remarks but with deep thanks to the Minister for her encouraging remarks. I beg leave withdraw to my amendment.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Your Ministers pleasure that this amendment is withdrawn? Amendment is withdrawn. Amendment for fourth the withdrawn. Amendment for fourth the 2445Z the 2445ZD not moved. Amendment 45 a Lord Knight not moved. The question is that clause 49 stand part of the bill. As many 49 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. We come now to clause 50 amendment 445B Baroness Barran.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Barran. I'm optimistic for a hat-trick from the noble Baroness the from the noble Baroness the Minister. Clause 50 is one of the Minister. Clause 50 is one of the clauses which leaves me most worried about the bill because I think it's about the bill because I think it's the one that risks directly damaging the education that children receive and again, that is obviously not what ministers intend, but it does appear to ignore the impact on school performance of sponsored academies.
Again, to be clear, not academies. Again, to be clear, not every single sponsored Academy, but overall I know that the Minister overall I know that the Minister will agree that the evidence shows really important impact and important impact on the lives of children in those schools. To be clear, I don't think anyone on my benches thinks that autonomy is a magic alert to solve the problems of any school whether it's failing or not, the key is how that autonomy is used.
Some MAT's have used their autonomy to focus on developing really great and deep expertise in turning around struggling schools, supporting staff and transforming outcomes for pupils. Others have focused on developing great curricula and of course there is lots of other examples and of course there are examples of professional generosity in the maintained sector as well. There are now 2796 sponsored academies in England, over 23% of our secondary schools. As we have heard from a number of your Lordships including Lords you earlier -- Lords Sewel, trusts have led to extraordinary turnarounds in some of the most difficult schools in our country and I pay tribute to everyone who is involved in that critical work.
But clause 50 changes that, no longer will a failing maintained schools automatically join a strong MAT, in her written ministerial statement published yesterday the Secretary of State wrote and I quote, subject to the passage of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, structural intervention through issuing of Academy orders will continue to be the default approach the schools and special measures because no child should be left in a school that does not have the capacity to improve. I am genuinely confused by that because I don't feel that is what the bill says, as it removes the section in the academies act 2010 which facilitated this intervention and I hope the noble Lady can explain and reassure me.
The government has argued that we should intervene earlier in schools that are struggling and nobody would disagree with that, we are already doing that in the Department when I was in office and of course if that works, that's the best outcome for children. The other argument that government has put forward is that directive Academy orders are too slow, but I think if the Minister has time to dig into the detail she will agree with me that the ones that are slow are really complicated, they either need significant financial help which the department is struggling to find department is struggling to find down the back of any education sofa, which might be in relation to capital or might be in relation to revenue, or there are very complex governance issues or in one case I can remember which was very slow there are tripling PFI contracts -- tripling -- crippling.
Even that doesn't stop immediate helping put in and the Minister will be familiar with a number of cases where this has happened often the trust taking considerable risks and commitment of resources without any guarantee they will end up being the sponsor for the school. They do it because it's the right thing to do. My amendment 445B aims to address the government's concern about delays but still keeping the urgency necessary to address the weaknesses in a particular school. So if no suitable responses available the Secretary of State has published the plan within 14 days setting out how she will support appropriate governance and leadership and rapid improvement.
This brings about the clarity and transparency that will be crucial to retain the confidence of parents, pupils and staff. I think that aligns with the Secretary of State's statement yesterday but if it doesn't I hope the Minister can explain where the gap is. Amendment 44 6 AM is to address a problem which is very likely to emerge as a result of the government's approach, namely an increase to the number of judicial reviews of Academy orders. Schools want to understand why they are not being given more support or more time to turnarounds, however valid any individual case might be, the outcome will be a slowing down and reduction in the use of Academy orders leaving pupils in failing schools for longer.
My amendment 446B aims to reintroduce the automatic Academy of those maintained schools that have either received a significant improvement judgement from OFSTED or whatever the latest languages, or however the Department and the chief inspector judge that to be framed. And where the rise teams believe that the school is significantly underperforming. The bill also fails to address another problem, those also under the previous OFSTED framework were repeatedly graded as requiring important -- improvement, some as many as seven times or more.
None of us in this House want our child to attend or work in a school that is so stuck in a rut of underperformance, and I know the decision to intervene in the so- called to RIPA schools and the secret language of school intervention was not universally welcomed including by Baroness Spielman, she and I debated this many times in her previous role, but the aim was to send a strong signal about the priority we put on addressing underperformance in a timely and effective way, and sadly the Secretary of State reversed this approach very early on in her tenure.
But again I would ask the Minister to reconsider whether this clause should stand part of the bill particularly given the Secretary of State's comments yesterday, where is the evidence that apartments propose to approach would be more effective? Children in failing schools need urgent action is the Secretary of State herself has said and sometimes the leadership of that school does not want to become part of a trust, but ultimately we need to be clear that the trust of the pupils must always come for first.
I beg to move
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the amendment than you my name in the clause. Men propose clause 50 page 1 more
21:57
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
-
-
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
valley outlines 1839 and assert the words as printed on the marshalled
**** Possible New Speaker ****
List. -- Amendment. I rise to speak to amendment 447 and 447ZB which appear in my name, and 447ZB which appear in my name, but I must begin by apologising to house and the Minister for failing to introduce my moments in the group before the break and thank Baroness Boycott the picking up the slack. My only explanation is a have spin only explanation is a have spin along 24-hour's. This is about that along 24-hour's. This is about that is currently drafted sits in awkward position.
In the long-term disastrous policy of academisation too often forced academisation resisted rally successfully by local and school communities, the bill and school communities, the bill makes half a U-turn. It ends the presumption that all new schools must be an academy and removes the duty to four schools into multi- academy trusts. As the National Education Union has said this is a Education Union has said this is a welcome shift in policy. But this is not a full U-turn, but 1/2 U-turn. not a full U-turn, but 1/2 U-turn.
It leaves far too many schools stuck pointed awkwardly at 90degrees cross pointed awkwardly at 90degrees cross flow of history like a vehicle on a traffic island with fast moving lorries, fast approaching from lorries, fast approaching from either direction. For the bill does not provide the option for schools and their communities that are unhappy in their current situation to leave multi-academy trusts and join the local authority system or other groups that are better suited to their needs. Making that provision provides the chance of escape for schools get out of the iron grip of dangerous and failed aetiology into the empowered position of local choice and decision making.
The kind of devolution government says it is in favour of. This is an area of policy favour of. This is an area of policy the Green Party as in so many other Sussman leaving's ever since it resisted from the start the disastrous push to free schools and academies that has fragmented our systems and seen enormous sums flowing into fat cat executive pay something we may come to the next group, and big supply contract profits who were not by multinational companies on the contractor bandwagon.
These two amendments take to possible approaches to dealing with the issue, starting to untangle the mess. But currently schools in multi-academy trusts lacks separate legal entities. Leaving is up, leaving it to the MAT board to delegate which powers it chooses, if any, to the Academy. It's a profoundly unequal relationship. Amendment for the 007 doesn't seek to directly prescribe and how to get out of this undeniably complex situation, rather creating a new clause in the bill direct from the Secretary of State to within 12 months of the act passing set out a report with proposals for converting academy chains individual academies and free schools to maintained schools under local authority control.
We've already had demonstrated that there are those within the chamber who remain attached to the idea of academisation, so I want to briefly set out some evidence and there is a lot more out there, of the failure of why schools already do and surely many more will if the option was available want to get back under the control of their local communities, the part of the communities they are part of. First two researchers from the UCL Institute of education who in 2018 reported no positive impact on the attainment and progress of pupils in MAT is compared to non-MAT schools, in larger mats with more than 16 schools particularly secondary schools the results were worse.
The education policy Institute in 2018 looking at Key stages two and four found Academy word this proportionately presented under the worst groups of primary under the worst groups of primary I'm no fan of Ofsted ratings, which the Green Party wants to abolish, but schools that join mats are more likely to decline with 30% of outstanding local authority schools keeping their grading, versus 7% of back primary schools that started with that status. As the issues of government, governance which are huge, the Public Accounts Committee in January, governance which are in January 2019 reported, " Parents and local people have to fight to obtain even basic information about their children's schools." And Academy trust you not do enough to explain and communicate decisions that affect the schools they responsible for.
And how they are spending public money." So what amendment for. Seven does is direct the Secretary of State to provide a way for these often very dissatisfied school communities who have no real records or ability to demand accountability under the mat demand accountability under the mat system to find a way forward. Now amendment 447.ZB is rather more daily ambitious and while I thank very much the national educational union, but Id rather starts to target the wheel to get those stuck schools of the dangerous traffic island and pointed in the direction they want to go.
So it provides for the creation of a new instrument, and Academy order to be delivered by the secretary of state if they receive representations from Academy school governing body, staff, parents, and all the local authority in support of converting the Academy school into a maintained school. The new clause also provides fairly and think appropriately broad ranging direction to the Secretary of State to consult such persons as they think appropriate about conversion. I'd be the first to admit this isn't a complete legal outline of the way forward, but it's a start, and I'd be delighted perhaps to hope the Minister and this is not forcing anything to happen.
The evidence is not just that many schools wanting out for the disempowering tangles they've been enmeshed in the antidemocratic system brought in over recent decades. And more than that, it means going against the evidence of what works for schools, communities and of course the pupils. I look forward our further debate.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
List. -- Amendment. I rise to speak to amendment 447 and 447ZB which appear in my name, and 447ZB which appear in my name, but I must begin by apologising to house and the Minister for failing to introduce my moments in the group before the break and thank Baroness Boycott the picking up the slack. My only explanation is a have spin only explanation is a have spin along 24-hour's. This is about that along 24-hour's. This is about that is currently drafted sits in awkward position.
In the long-term disastrous policy of academisation too often forced academisation resisted rally successfully by local and school communities, the bill and school communities, the bill makes half a U-turn. It ends the presumption that all new schools must be an academy and removes the duty to four schools into multi- academy trusts. As the National Education Union has said this is a Education Union has said this is a welcome shift in policy. But this is not a full U-turn, but 1/2 U-turn. not a full U-turn, but 1/2 U-turn.
It leaves far too many schools stuck pointed awkwardly at 90degrees cross pointed awkwardly at 90degrees cross flow of history like a vehicle on a traffic island with fast moving lorries, fast approaching from lorries, fast approaching from either direction. For the bill does not provide the option for schools and their communities that are unhappy in their current situation to leave multi-academy trusts and join the local authority system or other groups that are better suited to their needs. Making that provision provides the chance of escape for schools get out of the iron grip of dangerous and failed aetiology into the empowered position of local choice and decision making.
The kind of devolution government says it is in favour of. This is an area of policy favour of. This is an area of policy the Green Party as in so many other Sussman leaving's ever since it resisted from the start the disastrous push to free schools and academies that has fragmented our systems and seen enormous sums flowing into fat cat executive pay something we may come to the next group, and big supply contract profits who were not by multinational companies on the contractor bandwagon.
These two amendments take to possible approaches to dealing with the issue, starting to untangle the mess. But currently schools in multi-academy trusts lacks separate legal entities. Leaving is up, leaving it to the MAT board to delegate which powers it chooses, if any, to the Academy. It's a profoundly unequal relationship. Amendment for the 007 doesn't seek to directly prescribe and how to get out of this undeniably complex situation, rather creating a new clause in the bill direct from the Secretary of State to within 12 months of the act passing set out a report with proposals for converting academy chains individual academies and free schools to maintained schools under local authority control.
We've already had demonstrated that there are those within the chamber who remain attached to the idea of academisation, so I want to briefly set out some evidence and there is a lot more out there, of the failure of why schools already do and surely many more will if the option was available want to get back under the control of their local communities, the part of the communities they are part of. First two researchers from the UCL Institute of education who in 2018 reported no positive impact on the attainment and progress of pupils in MAT is compared to non-MAT schools, in larger mats with more than 16 schools particularly secondary schools the results were worse.
The education policy Institute in 2018 looking at Key stages two and four found Academy word this proportionately presented under the worst groups of primary under the worst groups of primary I'm no fan of Ofsted ratings, which the Green Party wants to abolish, but schools that join mats are more likely to decline with 30% of outstanding local authority schools keeping their grading, versus 7% of back primary schools that started with that status. As the issues of government, governance which are huge, the Public Accounts Committee in January, governance which are in January 2019 reported, " Parents and local people have to fight to obtain even basic information about their children's schools." And Academy trust you not do enough to explain and communicate decisions that affect the schools they responsible for.
And how they are spending public money." So what amendment for. Seven does is direct the Secretary of State to provide a way for these often very dissatisfied school communities who have no real records or ability to demand accountability under the mat demand accountability under the mat system to find a way forward. Now amendment 447.ZB is rather more daily ambitious and while I thank very much the national educational union, but Id rather starts to target the wheel to get those stuck schools of the dangerous traffic island and pointed in the direction they want to go.
So it provides for the creation of a new instrument, and Academy order to be delivered by the secretary of state if they receive representations from Academy school governing body, staff, parents, and all the local authority in support of converting the Academy school into a maintained school. The new clause also provides fairly and think appropriately broad ranging direction to the Secretary of State to consult such persons as they think appropriate about conversion. I'd be the first to admit this isn't a complete legal outline of the way forward, but it's a start, and I'd be delighted perhaps to hope the Minister and this is not forcing anything to happen.
The evidence is not just that many schools wanting out for the disempowering tangles they've been enmeshed in the antidemocratic system brought in over recent decades. And more than that, it means going against the evidence of what works for schools, communities and of course the pupils. I look forward our further debate.
22:04
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Spielman (Conservative)
I also wanted to speak briefly on this clause relating to Academy orders. And to support the amendments moved by my Noble Friends amendments moved by my Noble Friends Baroness Barran 445.B and 446A, and would have supported the amendment for six, but I don't think it's been moved. Unless I'm mistaken. In which case if I may, I will do so. Baroness Barran rightly said that I did not support the extension of Academy orders to requires improvement schools.
I remember writing to the then Secretary of State to warn him that among other things it would place inspection under impossible pressure and I think my assessment was borne out. And this government was quick to change its regulatory policies to remove their dependence on overall inspection judgements so the overall inspection judgements could be removed. But what we've seen over the last year is interesting because I think it's shown that the sector also dislikes unpredictable and opaque processes such as now operating, and with the loss of clarity every intervention decision potentially becomes just the opening salvo in a long war of attrition.
I experience quite a few of these sadly sometimes parent campaigns, sometimes quite misguided parent campaigns to defend the school that was in fact in a desperate state and where parents simply didn't realise quite how bad it was. But I know how debilitating some of these situations can be for all concerned and how drastically they can delay the kind of work and action that is needed to sort things out for children, and actually getting things sorted other children typically also sort things out for staff and makes their jobs doable again too.
And we also now have years of experience overrides teams and their predecessors. None of them have been found to be fully satisfactory. Each incarnation starts by recruiting school mat leaders take the time tends to morph into being a team of generalist officials who are not themselves equipped to provide support and sometimes struggle to identify the most appropriate alternative sources most appropriate alternative sources of help. So I support the proposals made by my Noble Friend for improvement and urge the government to think hard about how to make sure the consequences of failure, and it's important that we can recognise failure, but that consequences are clear, brisk and well implemented with the maximum certainty and the minimum delay, limbo uncertainty for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
all concerned. I thought just to get on the record I was looking around for evidence of what the current evidence of what the current situation is and I found this quote, which is helpful in our deliberations on this particular
I remember writing to the then Secretary of State to warn him that among other things it would place inspection under impossible pressure and I think my assessment was borne out. And this government was quick to change its regulatory policies to remove their dependence on overall inspection judgements so the overall inspection judgements could be removed. But what we've seen over the last year is interesting because I think it's shown that the sector also dislikes unpredictable and opaque processes such as now operating, and with the loss of clarity every intervention decision potentially becomes just the opening salvo in a long war of attrition.
I experience quite a few of these sadly sometimes parent campaigns, sometimes quite misguided parent campaigns to defend the school that was in fact in a desperate state and where parents simply didn't realise quite how bad it was. But I know how debilitating some of these situations can be for all concerned and how drastically they can delay the kind of work and action that is needed to sort things out for children, and actually getting things sorted other children typically also sort things out for staff and makes their jobs doable again too.
And we also now have years of experience overrides teams and their predecessors. None of them have been found to be fully satisfactory. Each incarnation starts by recruiting school mat leaders take the time tends to morph into being a team of generalist officials who are not themselves equipped to provide support and sometimes struggle to identify the most appropriate alternative sources most appropriate alternative sources of help. So I support the proposals made by my Noble Friend for improvement and urge the government to think hard about how to make sure the consequences of failure, and it's important that we can recognise failure, but that consequences are clear, brisk and well implemented with the maximum certainty and the minimum delay, limbo uncertainty for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
all concerned. I thought just to get on the record I was looking around for evidence of what the current evidence of what the current situation is and I found this quote, which is helpful in our deliberations on this particular
22:07
Lord Leigh of Hurley (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Leigh of Hurley (Conservative)
deliberations on this particular issue. Which was a quote that says, " I have serious concerns about the proposal to change the pathway for turning around failing schools. I know from bitter personal experience the learning change in the status of school can become highly political. The current system of which failing schools automatically become academies provides clarity and de- politicisation and ensures a rapid transition. I fear the making that process discretionary would result in a large increase in traditional reviews as has been mentioned, pressure on councils, and prolonged uncertainty, which is in nobody's interest." Encapsulates the situation quite neatly.
It's from Siobhain McDonagh, and it was on the 21st... Sorry, 8 January 2025. I provide a reference here, column 902 in Hansard, reference to my earlier remarks and I will put that on record as well for that they come from the Spectator on fifth February. But the thought she summarised the situation very fairly.
It's from Siobhain McDonagh, and it was on the 21st... Sorry, 8 January 2025. I provide a reference here, column 902 in Hansard, reference to my earlier remarks and I will put that on record as well for that they come from the Spectator on fifth February. But the thought she summarised the situation very fairly.
22:08
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
It's very late. For 46, an interesting idea inspired by academies if you like, where you have a successor maintained school and it's close to, you take over and have a nice successful model. In the maintained sector still. Now we have effectively said here or have been saying that we are accepting academies a part of the landscape. The fact that they are not the only successful part of the landscape because let's face it, if you are a maintained school you've done a reasonably well to be a maintained school.
So you've actually got something which has been successful. And if we are interested in success, not having a political flag run up, whatever colour you choose, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. And let's remember, some of the worst schools now will be academies because they've been failing and come down. And some of the most successful ones are the ones that jump ship because they have nice catchment areas and all is going well and become independent. That's the reality.
So I would hope that when we have a look at this, how we improve schools that go wrong, we have other options. Because if we dig into the Academy system, we can
**** Possible New Speaker ****
find serial failure anywhere. Turning now to the amendments in
So you've actually got something which has been successful. And if we are interested in success, not having a political flag run up, whatever colour you choose, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. And let's remember, some of the worst schools now will be academies because they've been failing and come down. And some of the most successful ones are the ones that jump ship because they have nice catchment areas and all is going well and become independent. That's the reality.
So I would hope that when we have a look at this, how we improve schools that go wrong, we have other options. Because if we dig into the Academy system, we can
**** Possible New Speaker ****
find serial failure anywhere. Turning now to the amendments in
22:10
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Turning now to the amendments in group 10, tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran, noble Lady Baroness Baroness Barran, noble Lady Baroness Bennett and my Noble Friend Lord Blunkett, who although he is in here, I will respond to that amendment, given it was addressed by the noble Lady Baroness Spielman. We've heard much today about the positive impact that high quality trusts have made on the educational outcomes of children. This government acknowledges these achievements. In fact I've done it on every occasion that I had the opportunity to, as has my right honourable friend the Secretary of State, as quoted by the Noble Lord Lord Lee.
We are concerned about is how we can ensure improvement, and I think the Noble Lord Addington was right when he said that what we need here is a range of appropriate methods in order to ensure the quickest possible improvement, and that's what the government is aiming to do here because whilst many academies and many trusts have driven improvement throughout the system, academisation is not necessarily a panacea. In fact even when sponsored academies are excluded, pupil attainment in multi-academy trusts and maintained schools is similar.
Furthermore, the process of converting these schools can in itself be slow. And the noble Lady Baroness Barran is right. That's because in many cases that is very complex. But nevertheless, that may well be a period of time in which the improvement that we would all want to see has not been able to be pushed. Around 40% of maintained schools identified for conversion take over a year to become academies, time during which people my pupils continue to experience underperformance. It's for those reasons the clause 50 has been included in the bill.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The honourable lady said 40% of those identified for conversion, and just thinking the Hansard I wonder whether she meant sponsorship? whether she meant sponsorship? Because conversion is officially a choice to become an academy. And if there is a delay from my experience, there is a delay from my experience, that might be situated somewhere in century buildings capacity. Error sponsorship is obviously when a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
sponsorship is obviously when a school has failed. Maybe she would like to clarify that in writing. I will clarify it in writing, but
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I will clarify it in writing, but I maintain the point that, which the noble Lady herself conceded, that noble Lady herself conceded, that often the conversion process, whatever has prompted it in the first place, is not as speedy as we would want in order to drive improvement, and that's why clause improvement, and that's why clause 50 has been included in the bill. So the swiftest action can be taken to improve schools causing concerns. The maintained schools that lack capacity to improve, currently two capacity to improve, currently two thirds of the total of schools that fail their Ofsted inspections, we fail their Ofsted inspections, we intend as has been highlighted during the debate today, we intend to continue to issue academy orders to continue to issue academy orders because they need a fresh start.
But where Ofsted has determined that the where Ofsted has determined that the school has the capacity to improve, from September 2026, we will rapidly deploy rise teams, our school improvement support as the first intervention rather than defaulting to structural change. Addressing the amendment tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran to remove clause 50, clause 50 replaces the current duty on the Secretary of State to issue an academy order for any maintained school judged to be any statutory category of concern by OFSTED with the discretionary power.
This represents as I suggested, deliver an considered shift in our approach stop it reflects the governance commitment to a more flexible and swift approach to school improvement. As Rebecca Boomer Clark of lift schools recently put it, structures don't raise standards. People do. Strong schools working together in strong partnerships will continue to make a difference. Clause 50 gives effect to this shift and enables a more responsive approach, one that prioritises timely support through rise whilst retaining the option of structural change if the school does not show significant improvement after 18 months of targeted support.
Turning to amendment 446 in the name of my Noble Friend Lord Blunkett, this amendment seeks to introduce a statutory presumption of structural intervention, either through structural change or merger in a scoreless in special measures but also gives the secretary of state discretion to act differently if that is their judgement. As my Noble Friend I'm sure would recognise, clause 50 orally provides the Secretary of State with the wide- ranging flexibility to intervene as they think best, specifically on merging schools. The secretary of state only has the power to require an maintained school to join the Federation which is similar in effect to a merger, so we don't believe that my Noble Friend's amendment is required.
Turning to amendments 445.B, 446 to letter a and 4462B from the noble Lady Baroness Barran, all of which seek to retain or reintroduce the statutory duty to issue academy orders, albeit with varying conditions or constraints, each of these amendments in different ways which undermine the core purpose of clause 50, which is to provide the Secretary of State with the flexibility to determine the most appropriate intervention to each school, based on its unique school, based on its unique Amendment 45B proposes retaining the duty to issue Academy orders with an exemption whensuitable sponsor trust is available.
I do appreciate the noble Ladies and intent to avoid stuck schools, those 50 already addresses this issue by removing the addresses this issue by removing the duty altogether. I will not repeat why we believe structural intervention is not always the most appropriate immediate response but I will emphasise that removing the automatic trigger for academisation enables us to deploy targeted school support swiftly to rise teams, the lengthy time it can take to academy the failing school. This would constrain our ability to act in the best interests of children.
Amendment 446 A6 to prevent judicial review of decisions to issue an academy order. I appreciate the noble Ladies concern about the potential legal challenges if the duty is removed and I know this is something that noble Lords raised at second reading. Judicial reviews however are an important legal safeguard as the noble Lady will know the previous government policy was to issue Academy orders to closely maintained schools using a discretionary power not duty. That policy led to over 100 such schools becoming sponsored academies by January 2025 with no evidence that legal challenges cause systemic delays to intervention in those cases but we have already committed to publishing a clear, lawful policy for intervention during decisions are transparent, proportionate, and in the best interests of each school.
It is right that those affected by such decisions retain the ability to challenge them when appropriate, removing this right would risk undermining trust in the system and disenfranchising those most affected. Amendment 446B was framed as refinement effectively reintroduces a very duty we are seeking to appeal, to issue Academy orders to schools identified as requiring significant improvement either by OFSTED or assessed by rise teams to be significantly underperforming in comparison to their peers. Our intention in repealing the duty as I previously said is to provide greater flexibility.
This would constrain the Secretary of State's ability to implement abroad and faster range of tailored support for schools requiring significant improvement and would risk imposing structural change may not be necessary or effective and therefore undermines the core purpose of our intervention policy objective. It also misunderstand the role of rise teams which is to support the efforts of schools and their responsible bodies. They are not Inspectorate. Turning to amendments 447 and 447Z Turning to amendments 447 and 447ZE from Baroness Bennett, amendment 447 proposes a review into converting academies local authority control and abundant 447ZB would introduce an academy reverse order mechanism.
These proposals run contrary to our policy direction. The Secretary of State has been clear there are no immediate plans to allow academies to revert to maintained status. We are indeed, we are instead focused on building a diversified school system breaking down barriers to opportunity by driving high and rising standards well schools benefit from collaboration and partnership sharing expertise and strong governance. It isn't sensible to breakup successful multi-academy trusts which have transformed the education of children especially in deprived areas.
Where concerns arise about trust performance there are already mechanisms in place for parents and staff to raise issues and for the Department intervene where necessary. We believe these safeguards are sufficient and reversing academisation would be disruptive and counter-productive. Clause 50 is about empowering the Secretary of State to act in the best interests of children. Far from leading to the weakening of school improvement were exaggerated. That reason and the assurances I provided I hope Lord will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Before she sits down and naturally taking some encouragement from her remarks because I rate down underlined the government has no immediate plans which is interesting because that is a statement of a because that is a statement of a possibility in the future. What I possibility in the future. What I would ask the noble Lady to consider when she considers the fact that future proofing, we all know how future proofing, we all know how hard it is to get bills Parliamentary time to get Bill through Parliament, the government will certainly attest to that, wouldn't it be a good idea to provide the potential here the don't provide the potential here the don't necessarily have to activate, set up some mechanism for possibility to get the kind of diversity that you
**** Possible New Speaker ****
say you're looking for? I also said the proposals run contrary to our policy and I contrary to our policy and I wouldn't want the noble Lady to run away with anything that is unlikely
**** Possible New Speaker ****
to happen, so no. I'm very reassured by the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm very reassured by the Minister's final remarks and I'm not sure if Baroness Bennett was in the
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Turning now to the amendments in group 10, tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran, noble Lady Baroness Baroness Barran, noble Lady Baroness Bennett and my Noble Friend Lord Blunkett, who although he is in here, I will respond to that amendment, given it was addressed by the noble Lady Baroness Spielman. We've heard much today about the positive impact that high quality trusts have made on the educational outcomes of children. This government acknowledges these achievements. In fact I've done it on every occasion that I had the opportunity to, as has my right honourable friend the Secretary of State, as quoted by the Noble Lord Lord Lee.
We are concerned about is how we can ensure improvement, and I think the Noble Lord Addington was right when he said that what we need here is a range of appropriate methods in order to ensure the quickest possible improvement, and that's what the government is aiming to do here because whilst many academies and many trusts have driven improvement throughout the system, academisation is not necessarily a panacea. In fact even when sponsored academies are excluded, pupil attainment in multi-academy trusts and maintained schools is similar.
Furthermore, the process of converting these schools can in itself be slow. And the noble Lady Baroness Barran is right. That's because in many cases that is very complex. But nevertheless, that may well be a period of time in which the improvement that we would all want to see has not been able to be pushed. Around 40% of maintained schools identified for conversion take over a year to become academies, time during which people my pupils continue to experience underperformance. It's for those reasons the clause 50 has been included in the bill.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
The honourable lady said 40% of those identified for conversion, and just thinking the Hansard I wonder whether she meant sponsorship? whether she meant sponsorship? Because conversion is officially a choice to become an academy. And if there is a delay from my experience, there is a delay from my experience, that might be situated somewhere in century buildings capacity. Error sponsorship is obviously when a
**** Possible New Speaker ****
sponsorship is obviously when a school has failed. Maybe she would like to clarify that in writing. I will clarify it in writing, but
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I will clarify it in writing, but I maintain the point that, which the noble Lady herself conceded, that noble Lady herself conceded, that often the conversion process, whatever has prompted it in the first place, is not as speedy as we would want in order to drive improvement, and that's why clause improvement, and that's why clause 50 has been included in the bill. So the swiftest action can be taken to improve schools causing concerns. The maintained schools that lack capacity to improve, currently two capacity to improve, currently two thirds of the total of schools that fail their Ofsted inspections, we fail their Ofsted inspections, we intend as has been highlighted during the debate today, we intend to continue to issue academy orders to continue to issue academy orders because they need a fresh start.
But where Ofsted has determined that the where Ofsted has determined that the school has the capacity to improve, from September 2026, we will rapidly deploy rise teams, our school improvement support as the first intervention rather than defaulting to structural change. Addressing the amendment tabled by the noble Lady Baroness Barran to remove clause 50, clause 50 replaces the current duty on the Secretary of State to issue an academy order for any maintained school judged to be any statutory category of concern by OFSTED with the discretionary power.
This represents as I suggested, deliver an considered shift in our approach stop it reflects the governance commitment to a more flexible and swift approach to school improvement. As Rebecca Boomer Clark of lift schools recently put it, structures don't raise standards. People do. Strong schools working together in strong partnerships will continue to make a difference. Clause 50 gives effect to this shift and enables a more responsive approach, one that prioritises timely support through rise whilst retaining the option of structural change if the school does not show significant improvement after 18 months of targeted support.
Turning to amendment 446 in the name of my Noble Friend Lord Blunkett, this amendment seeks to introduce a statutory presumption of structural intervention, either through structural change or merger in a scoreless in special measures but also gives the secretary of state discretion to act differently if that is their judgement. As my Noble Friend I'm sure would recognise, clause 50 orally provides the Secretary of State with the wide- ranging flexibility to intervene as they think best, specifically on merging schools. The secretary of state only has the power to require an maintained school to join the Federation which is similar in effect to a merger, so we don't believe that my Noble Friend's amendment is required.
Turning to amendments 445.B, 446 to letter a and 4462B from the noble Lady Baroness Barran, all of which seek to retain or reintroduce the statutory duty to issue academy orders, albeit with varying conditions or constraints, each of these amendments in different ways which undermine the core purpose of clause 50, which is to provide the Secretary of State with the flexibility to determine the most appropriate intervention to each school, based on its unique school, based on its unique Amendment 45B proposes retaining the duty to issue Academy orders with an exemption whensuitable sponsor trust is available.
I do appreciate the noble Ladies and intent to avoid stuck schools, those 50 already addresses this issue by removing the addresses this issue by removing the duty altogether. I will not repeat why we believe structural intervention is not always the most appropriate immediate response but I will emphasise that removing the automatic trigger for academisation enables us to deploy targeted school support swiftly to rise teams, the lengthy time it can take to academy the failing school. This would constrain our ability to act in the best interests of children.
Amendment 446 A6 to prevent judicial review of decisions to issue an academy order. I appreciate the noble Ladies concern about the potential legal challenges if the duty is removed and I know this is something that noble Lords raised at second reading. Judicial reviews however are an important legal safeguard as the noble Lady will know the previous government policy was to issue Academy orders to closely maintained schools using a discretionary power not duty. That policy led to over 100 such schools becoming sponsored academies by January 2025 with no evidence that legal challenges cause systemic delays to intervention in those cases but we have already committed to publishing a clear, lawful policy for intervention during decisions are transparent, proportionate, and in the best interests of each school.
It is right that those affected by such decisions retain the ability to challenge them when appropriate, removing this right would risk undermining trust in the system and disenfranchising those most affected. Amendment 446B was framed as refinement effectively reintroduces a very duty we are seeking to appeal, to issue Academy orders to schools identified as requiring significant improvement either by OFSTED or assessed by rise teams to be significantly underperforming in comparison to their peers. Our intention in repealing the duty as I previously said is to provide greater flexibility.
This would constrain the Secretary of State's ability to implement abroad and faster range of tailored support for schools requiring significant improvement and would risk imposing structural change may not be necessary or effective and therefore undermines the core purpose of our intervention policy objective. It also misunderstand the role of rise teams which is to support the efforts of schools and their responsible bodies. They are not Inspectorate. Turning to amendments 447 and 447Z Turning to amendments 447 and 447ZE from Baroness Bennett, amendment 447 proposes a review into converting academies local authority control and abundant 447ZB would introduce an academy reverse order mechanism.
These proposals run contrary to our policy direction. The Secretary of State has been clear there are no immediate plans to allow academies to revert to maintained status. We are indeed, we are instead focused on building a diversified school system breaking down barriers to opportunity by driving high and rising standards well schools benefit from collaboration and partnership sharing expertise and strong governance. It isn't sensible to breakup successful multi-academy trusts which have transformed the education of children especially in deprived areas.
Where concerns arise about trust performance there are already mechanisms in place for parents and staff to raise issues and for the Department intervene where necessary. We believe these safeguards are sufficient and reversing academisation would be disruptive and counter-productive. Clause 50 is about empowering the Secretary of State to act in the best interests of children. Far from leading to the weakening of school improvement were exaggerated. That reason and the assurances I provided I hope Lord will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Before she sits down and naturally taking some encouragement from her remarks because I rate down underlined the government has no immediate plans which is interesting because that is a statement of a because that is a statement of a possibility in the future. What I possibility in the future. What I would ask the noble Lady to consider when she considers the fact that future proofing, we all know how future proofing, we all know how hard it is to get bills Parliamentary time to get Bill through Parliament, the government will certainly attest to that, wouldn't it be a good idea to provide the potential here the don't provide the potential here the don't necessarily have to activate, set up some mechanism for possibility to get the kind of diversity that you
**** Possible New Speaker ****
say you're looking for? I also said the proposals run contrary to our policy and I contrary to our policy and I wouldn't want the noble Lady to run away with anything that is unlikely
**** Possible New Speaker ****
to happen, so no. I'm very reassured by the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I'm very reassured by the Minister's final remarks and I'm not sure if Baroness Bennett was in the
22:21
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
sure if Baroness Bennett was in the chamber when I try to respond to Baroness by Stead's comments but I just think it is important to set aside one's ideology and look at the results and the people who are leading those results in our schools all around the country and celebrate them. I would just like to thank Baroness Spielman and Lord LEA for their reinforcements and support for my amendments. I absolutely agree with Baroness Spielman that we need a system, clarity which is brisk, well prevented and with minimum delay I think were her words, and I think that's important and I think that's what the Minister hopes will that's what the Minister hopes will happen.
I appreciate the clarity that the noble Lady brought in relation to OFSTED judgements where the judgement says the school in question lacks the capacity to improve, will be interesting to hear my noble friend Baroness Spielman's on that weather again that puts great pressure on OFSTED inspectors doing some way avoid that judgement. For another day and another time perhaps. I think there Baroness makes a fair point about the WRI plus power and the fact those decisions which I have to say I feel quite proud of when JR done but I suppose the context perhaps is a little different but I think the noble Lady has brought helpful clarity to the governance intention, I think until we see proof in the pudding we will remain concerned with that.
I beg leave to withdraw my amendments. my amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Is it your amendments -- logics pleasure that the amendment is withdrawn? Amendment by leave withdrawn. Amendment 446 not moved. Amendment 44 6 AM 446B not moved on Amendment 44 6 AM 446B not moved on block. -- On block. The question is that clause 50 stand part of the that clause 50 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Amendment 447 not moved.
Amendment 447 ZA has been withdrawn. Amendment 447 ZA has been withdrawn. Amendment 447 said be not moved. The question is the clause 51 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Schedule three
I appreciate the clarity that the noble Lady brought in relation to OFSTED judgements where the judgement says the school in question lacks the capacity to improve, will be interesting to hear my noble friend Baroness Spielman's on that weather again that puts great pressure on OFSTED inspectors doing some way avoid that judgement. For another day and another time perhaps. I think there Baroness makes a fair point about the WRI plus power and the fact those decisions which I have to say I feel quite proud of when JR done but I suppose the context perhaps is a little different but I think the noble Lady has brought helpful clarity to the governance intention, I think until we see proof in the pudding we will remain concerned with that.
I beg leave to withdraw my amendments. my amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Is it your amendments -- logics pleasure that the amendment is withdrawn? Amendment by leave withdrawn. Amendment 446 not moved. Amendment 44 6 AM 446B not moved on Amendment 44 6 AM 446B not moved on block. -- On block. The question is that clause 50 stand part of the that clause 50 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Amendment 447 not moved.
Amendment 447 ZA has been withdrawn. Amendment 447 ZA has been withdrawn. Amendment 447 said be not moved. The question is the clause 51 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Schedule three
22:24
Baroness Bousted (Labour)
-
-
**** Possible New Speaker ****
amendment 447 a Baroness Boustead. I'm aware it's very late at night, indeed I've waited a long night, indeed I've waited a long time to bring the amendment but is not a long speech was the amendment is very simple, makes one change in one addition to the bill and that is to bring, usually multi-academy trusts but it might seem Chief Executive officers under the leaders of the school teachers are enumeration body. This is a necessary step to advance a good use of money in the provision of education the nation's children.
As we know this is or at least it was a cross-party concern. Lord Agnew who isn't here, when he served as academies minister in the last government was highly concerned about the apparently exponential rise in the pay of multi-academy trusts CEOs, indeed so grave was his concern that I think on two occasions he wrote to the chair of trustees of MAT so awarding what he considers to be excessive pay rises to their CEOs and call them into his office to meet them to hear the justification for the awards.
If he was here I would have assured my noble friend that I would very much have liked to been a fly on the wall at these meetings. In 2018 he wrote a letter to the chairs of the Academy trust in England and in that letter he emphasised the priority that he attached to the responsibility that they and their boards had to deliver, to ensure that their executive teams manage their budgets effectively and deliver the best value for money. And added that this was particularly important in looking at the pay of their senior executive leadership their senior executive leadership teams.
He added that then Chief Executive of the Education and Skills Funding Agency had written to a number of single Academy trusts where enumeration for trust employ was over 150,000 and he would writing to all MAT's whether supplied he added, I believe that not all boards are being rigorous enough on this issue. CEO senior pay should reflect the improvements they make to schools performance and how efficiently they run their trusts. I would not expect the pay of a CEO or other non-teaching staff to increase faster than the pay award for teachers.
In 2019 Lord Agnew wrote again to the chairs of the boards of trusts in the latter headed, excessive high pay to employees. Requiring information from those trusts on the salaries and bonuses paid to individuals in those trusts earning more than 100,000. This might not happen too often so it is perhaps a little noteworthy that I entirely agree with my noble friend Lord Agnew. I'm tired agree that the pay of CEOs and other team non- teaching staff should not increase faster than the pay for teachers.
Is more with a small C Conservative than that, it was simply, put the pay of MAT CEOs and single Academy trust CEOs within the remit of the School Teachers' Review Body as is I gave evidence to the STRB for over 20 years both as general secretary of the Association of teachers and lecturers in the joint general secretary of the National Education Union. The process of giving evidence is rigorous, STRB witnesses are required to submit detailed written evidence to the board on the pay awards that they feel are necessary and just for teachers and leaders.
The evidence takes into account the relative pay rises of other workers of public and private sectors, the stage of recruitment in the teaching profession and a host of other evidence. STRB then holds in personal oral sessions while witnesses are required to elaborate and build on their written submissions. The review body then considers all the evidence it has been given including evidence from the Department of education makes a recommendation to government which the government must then decide whether or not to accept. All this amendment would do, all it would put in place is the same rigorous arrangements for CEOs of single and multi-academy trusts.
This is a necessary step because there has been an inflationary spiral in CEO pay. Schools Week, the trade newspaper, conduct an annual executive pay investigation which What What this What this analysis What this analysis found What this analysis found was What this analysis found was that the gap between CEO and other staff in multi-academy trusts is widening the pay gap. 64 CEOs and more than £200,000 per year, five multi- academy trusts registered increases of over 20% or more in the senior pay. These pay rises may be justified, the problem for the taxpayer is the taxpayer doesn't know the reason behind them, we don't have definition of what the job description of a CEO is, how is it different from head teacher? What is the job wait? And how is it weighed by the boards by the governing bodies? The danger inappropriate red legislation of CEO By the National governance Association, the deputy CEO who remarked salary benchmarking for CEOs is in some cases leading to inflationary spirals.
He added, the benchmark exercises don't come within a camping narrative on how this deals with massive pressures sectors under, namely money, money being in short supply and ongoing recruitment and retention challenges and insufficient accountability for this role. I also taught recently to the chair of the trustees about the process, the recruitment process for a CEO of a five school MAT in the north-east. She told me candidly that her greatest challenge in this process would be to resist the consultants who had argued the salary of over £200,000 was needed to attract the right candidate.
She felt strongly that it would be perfect possible to offer a lower salary and attract a good candidate, she said want a CEO who understands the value of public service not private profit. These questions the Labour government did look at when it was in power roundabout 200,007 track 2007, the government then asked Price Waterhouse Cooper to issue a investigation full stop I seem to remember the report was very lengthy and inconclusive. I'm sure the STRB would do much better.
This man will give the STRB their son's ability of making a recommendation on CEO pay in addition to its current responsibility to make a In doing so the STRB would consider all of the relevant issues, recruitment and retention aspect for CEO positions, they had to fill? The relative weight of the CEO role in comparison with other senior roles in the trust, taking to account the private sector and place that within the functioning, funding situation in schools. All these considerations would be in my view highly desirable and effective.
I want to make one final point. An order of trust with 50 more schools done by schools week in 2023 revealed that women occupied just under 32% of CEO rules, and this in -- roles and a profession which is 75% female full stops so they can given mandate to look at diversity in senior leadership in teaching to ensure that the top roles do not continue to be as they currently are, too often jobs for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the boys. Amendment proposed, schedule three, page 128, line 24 can attend three, page 128, line 24 can attend and set the words as printed on the marshalled list.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
marshalled list. I rise briefly in support of men and four for eight dollars to a in the name of the Noble Lord story and
Baroness Bousted (Labour)
**** Possible New Speaker ****
amendment 447 a Baroness Boustead. I'm aware it's very late at night, indeed I've waited a long night, indeed I've waited a long time to bring the amendment but is not a long speech was the amendment is very simple, makes one change in one addition to the bill and that is to bring, usually multi-academy trusts but it might seem Chief Executive officers under the leaders of the school teachers are enumeration body. This is a necessary step to advance a good use of money in the provision of education the nation's children.
As we know this is or at least it was a cross-party concern. Lord Agnew who isn't here, when he served as academies minister in the last government was highly concerned about the apparently exponential rise in the pay of multi-academy trusts CEOs, indeed so grave was his concern that I think on two occasions he wrote to the chair of trustees of MAT so awarding what he considers to be excessive pay rises to their CEOs and call them into his office to meet them to hear the justification for the awards.
If he was here I would have assured my noble friend that I would very much have liked to been a fly on the wall at these meetings. In 2018 he wrote a letter to the chairs of the Academy trust in England and in that letter he emphasised the priority that he attached to the responsibility that they and their boards had to deliver, to ensure that their executive teams manage their budgets effectively and deliver the best value for money. And added that this was particularly important in looking at the pay of their senior executive leadership their senior executive leadership teams.
He added that then Chief Executive of the Education and Skills Funding Agency had written to a number of single Academy trusts where enumeration for trust employ was over 150,000 and he would writing to all MAT's whether supplied he added, I believe that not all boards are being rigorous enough on this issue. CEO senior pay should reflect the improvements they make to schools performance and how efficiently they run their trusts. I would not expect the pay of a CEO or other non-teaching staff to increase faster than the pay award for teachers.
In 2019 Lord Agnew wrote again to the chairs of the boards of trusts in the latter headed, excessive high pay to employees. Requiring information from those trusts on the salaries and bonuses paid to individuals in those trusts earning more than 100,000. This might not happen too often so it is perhaps a little noteworthy that I entirely agree with my noble friend Lord Agnew. I'm tired agree that the pay of CEOs and other team non- teaching staff should not increase faster than the pay for teachers.
Is more with a small C Conservative than that, it was simply, put the pay of MAT CEOs and single Academy trust CEOs within the remit of the School Teachers' Review Body as is I gave evidence to the STRB for over 20 years both as general secretary of the Association of teachers and lecturers in the joint general secretary of the National Education Union. The process of giving evidence is rigorous, STRB witnesses are required to submit detailed written evidence to the board on the pay awards that they feel are necessary and just for teachers and leaders.
The evidence takes into account the relative pay rises of other workers of public and private sectors, the stage of recruitment in the teaching profession and a host of other evidence. STRB then holds in personal oral sessions while witnesses are required to elaborate and build on their written submissions. The review body then considers all the evidence it has been given including evidence from the Department of education makes a recommendation to government which the government must then decide whether or not to accept. All this amendment would do, all it would put in place is the same rigorous arrangements for CEOs of single and multi-academy trusts.
This is a necessary step because there has been an inflationary spiral in CEO pay. Schools Week, the trade newspaper, conduct an annual executive pay investigation which What What this What this analysis What this analysis found What this analysis found was What this analysis found was that the gap between CEO and other staff in multi-academy trusts is widening the pay gap. 64 CEOs and more than £200,000 per year, five multi- academy trusts registered increases of over 20% or more in the senior pay. These pay rises may be justified, the problem for the taxpayer is the taxpayer doesn't know the reason behind them, we don't have definition of what the job description of a CEO is, how is it different from head teacher? What is the job wait? And how is it weighed by the boards by the governing bodies? The danger inappropriate red legislation of CEO By the National governance Association, the deputy CEO who remarked salary benchmarking for CEOs is in some cases leading to inflationary spirals.
He added, the benchmark exercises don't come within a camping narrative on how this deals with massive pressures sectors under, namely money, money being in short supply and ongoing recruitment and retention challenges and insufficient accountability for this role. I also taught recently to the chair of the trustees about the process, the recruitment process for a CEO of a five school MAT in the north-east. She told me candidly that her greatest challenge in this process would be to resist the consultants who had argued the salary of over £200,000 was needed to attract the right candidate.
She felt strongly that it would be perfect possible to offer a lower salary and attract a good candidate, she said want a CEO who understands the value of public service not private profit. These questions the Labour government did look at when it was in power roundabout 200,007 track 2007, the government then asked Price Waterhouse Cooper to issue a investigation full stop I seem to remember the report was very lengthy and inconclusive. I'm sure the STRB would do much better.
This man will give the STRB their son's ability of making a recommendation on CEO pay in addition to its current responsibility to make a In doing so the STRB would consider all of the relevant issues, recruitment and retention aspect for CEO positions, they had to fill? The relative weight of the CEO role in comparison with other senior roles in the trust, taking to account the private sector and place that within the functioning, funding situation in schools. All these considerations would be in my view highly desirable and effective.
I want to make one final point. An order of trust with 50 more schools done by schools week in 2023 revealed that women occupied just under 32% of CEO rules, and this in -- roles and a profession which is 75% female full stops so they can given mandate to look at diversity in senior leadership in teaching to ensure that the top roles do not continue to be as they currently are, too often jobs for
**** Possible New Speaker ****
the boys. Amendment proposed, schedule three, page 128, line 24 can attend three, page 128, line 24 can attend and set the words as printed on the marshalled list.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
marshalled list. I rise briefly in support of men and four for eight dollars to a in the name of the Noble Lord story and
22:32
Lord Hampton (Crossbench)
-
-
Lord Hampton (Crossbench)
the name of the Noble Lord story and the noble Lady Baroness Barran, to which I have added my name. I must declare an interest, I've been a member of teaching unions but some are in the line I got the slip. I confess as this bill goes through, I'm learning a lot about education. I didn't realise that as a non-union member, I wasn't naturally entitled to legal representation for complaint if a complaint was made amends me. Doesn't sound entirely legal.
-- Made against me. I believe unions do a good job and are necessary part of teaching for many people, but part of a union shouldn't determine whether a shouldn't determine whether a teacher feels safe and supported. Amendment 448A promises important improvements to working conditions within the teaching profession. Referrals to the teaching regulation agency have more than doubled over the last three years. As the noble and learned a lot stories about point out, one in four teachers are subject to an allegation from a student or parent at some point in their career.
And as a result, many are subject to disciplinary investigations and hearings. This puts pressure on teachers in what is already a highly pressurised job. The process of investigation can severely impact a teacher's mental health or ability to fulfil their job. This issue demands careful attention to prevent a worsening of recruitment and retention crisis. Teachers need to be able to raise their own concerns, grievances or requests for flexible working arrangements. Many schools already allow trained companions, but that is exactly the problem.
It depends on the goodwill of individual heads without legal clarity, the practice is inconsistent. Exercising equal working rights should not be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
dependent on a union membership. I too would like to speak in
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I too would like to speak in support of amendment 448.A, which I believe represents a significant step forward in promoting fairness step forward in promoting fairness within the teaching profession. Just as there are many reasons why as there are many reasons why someone might choose not to join a clinical party, there were likewise numerous legitimate reasons why teacher may opt not to join a union. But I fully support the right of teachers to join trade unions, it is deeply concerning that many feel deeply concerning that many feel they must do so merely to secure access to appropriate representation access to appropriate representation when facing formal proceedings.
No when facing formal proceedings. No individual should feel compelled to join a union solely for the legal protection it affords. Yet evidence from representative surveys
-- Made against me. I believe unions do a good job and are necessary part of teaching for many people, but part of a union shouldn't determine whether a shouldn't determine whether a teacher feels safe and supported. Amendment 448A promises important improvements to working conditions within the teaching profession. Referrals to the teaching regulation agency have more than doubled over the last three years. As the noble and learned a lot stories about point out, one in four teachers are subject to an allegation from a student or parent at some point in their career.
And as a result, many are subject to disciplinary investigations and hearings. This puts pressure on teachers in what is already a highly pressurised job. The process of investigation can severely impact a teacher's mental health or ability to fulfil their job. This issue demands careful attention to prevent a worsening of recruitment and retention crisis. Teachers need to be able to raise their own concerns, grievances or requests for flexible working arrangements. Many schools already allow trained companions, but that is exactly the problem.
It depends on the goodwill of individual heads without legal clarity, the practice is inconsistent. Exercising equal working rights should not be
**** Possible New Speaker ****
dependent on a union membership. I too would like to speak in
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I too would like to speak in support of amendment 448.A, which I believe represents a significant step forward in promoting fairness step forward in promoting fairness within the teaching profession. Just as there are many reasons why as there are many reasons why someone might choose not to join a clinical party, there were likewise numerous legitimate reasons why teacher may opt not to join a union. But I fully support the right of teachers to join trade unions, it is deeply concerning that many feel deeply concerning that many feel they must do so merely to secure access to appropriate representation access to appropriate representation when facing formal proceedings.
No when facing formal proceedings. No individual should feel compelled to join a union solely for the legal protection it affords. Yet evidence from representative surveys
22:35
Lord Ashcombe (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Ashcombe (Conservative)
from representative surveys indicates that many teachers do precisely that. Joining primarily the legal support in the face of allegations. At its core, this amendment is about one fundamental principle. That teachers access to support and formal disciplinary or grievance proceedings should not be contingent on their political beliefs or union membership status. At this juncture I should declare an interest in as much as my wife, the chair of a governor, Board of Governors of the foundation School is currently in the process of a disciplinary procedure.
Process. The issue before us the basic rights, is the basic rate to be accompanied. At present this right is extended only to union members or to those who can identify a suitable colleague. What of the many teachers and increasing number who fear entirely valid reasons can access neither? These are not theoretical concerns. There are teachers who prefer independent forms of support, teachers who are uncomfortable sharing sensitive or personal information with colleagues. Teachers who, as is their right, choose not to participate in a collective structure.
Tens of thousands of such professionals exist within our education system. They are not exempt from the formal process. Yet they are expected to face them alone. This is a question of fairness. We only recognise this principle in other sectors. Under the NHS is maintaining high professional standards framework, doctors and dentists entitled to be accompanied by representatives from defence organisations such as the NTU or NTS. This is not undermining the role of unions in healthcare. Rather it has ensured that highly scrutinised professionals are not left unsupported at crucial moments.
It's only right that teachers who work and conduct similar levels of public and institutional scrutiny should be afforded the same basic should be afforded the same basic protection. We debated a similar issue during the passage of the Employment Rights Bill, and I anticipate the same concern may be raised again today, namely that whitening accompanying rights risks lawyering up of the disciplinary procedures. With respect, this is a mischaracterisation of the amendment and of the current legal framework. The law already imposes clear limitations on the role of companion in such hearings, and this amendment does not alter those parameters.
It does not introduce legal representation into the ring. Indeed it's worth noting under the current law, a teacher who is a union member may be accompanied by a lawyer, provided that individual holds union office status. Without the need for employer approval. A teacher outside a union has no statutory right even to a trained nonlegal hand. This is the imbalance that this amendment seeks to address. As unions themselves often emphasise, far from escalating matters, the presence of a trained companion often reduces procedural errors and resolve issues before they spiral.
This is about fairness, not formality and about extending protection, not creating confrontation. It's not about undermining unions but extending a basic protection to all teachers regardless of their affiliations. This is a modest and reasonable proposal. It does not diminish the role of unions, rather technologies the freedom of association, including the freedom not to associate. No teacher should be disadvantaged for choosing an alternative form of professional support. If we believe in individual liberty and procedural fairness, then we should not turn a blind eye to a group of professionals facing a complex, often career defining moments supported.
-- Unsupported. This amendment would impose no additional financial burden on schools. On the contrary it is likely to result in savings in time and resources that would otherwise be spent on facilitating teachers to bring colleagues to hearings.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Arrestable government for 48 in my name. And I do so as a former member, membership secretary of the NTE and then as a member of the National Association of Head Teachers. I can say it any better than Lord Hampton and Lord
Process. The issue before us the basic rights, is the basic rate to be accompanied. At present this right is extended only to union members or to those who can identify a suitable colleague. What of the many teachers and increasing number who fear entirely valid reasons can access neither? These are not theoretical concerns. There are teachers who prefer independent forms of support, teachers who are uncomfortable sharing sensitive or personal information with colleagues. Teachers who, as is their right, choose not to participate in a collective structure.
Tens of thousands of such professionals exist within our education system. They are not exempt from the formal process. Yet they are expected to face them alone. This is a question of fairness. We only recognise this principle in other sectors. Under the NHS is maintaining high professional standards framework, doctors and dentists entitled to be accompanied by representatives from defence organisations such as the NTU or NTS. This is not undermining the role of unions in healthcare. Rather it has ensured that highly scrutinised professionals are not left unsupported at crucial moments.
It's only right that teachers who work and conduct similar levels of public and institutional scrutiny should be afforded the same basic should be afforded the same basic protection. We debated a similar issue during the passage of the Employment Rights Bill, and I anticipate the same concern may be raised again today, namely that whitening accompanying rights risks lawyering up of the disciplinary procedures. With respect, this is a mischaracterisation of the amendment and of the current legal framework. The law already imposes clear limitations on the role of companion in such hearings, and this amendment does not alter those parameters.
It does not introduce legal representation into the ring. Indeed it's worth noting under the current law, a teacher who is a union member may be accompanied by a lawyer, provided that individual holds union office status. Without the need for employer approval. A teacher outside a union has no statutory right even to a trained nonlegal hand. This is the imbalance that this amendment seeks to address. As unions themselves often emphasise, far from escalating matters, the presence of a trained companion often reduces procedural errors and resolve issues before they spiral.
This is about fairness, not formality and about extending protection, not creating confrontation. It's not about undermining unions but extending a basic protection to all teachers regardless of their affiliations. This is a modest and reasonable proposal. It does not diminish the role of unions, rather technologies the freedom of association, including the freedom not to associate. No teacher should be disadvantaged for choosing an alternative form of professional support. If we believe in individual liberty and procedural fairness, then we should not turn a blind eye to a group of professionals facing a complex, often career defining moments supported.
-- Unsupported. This amendment would impose no additional financial burden on schools. On the contrary it is likely to result in savings in time and resources that would otherwise be spent on facilitating teachers to bring colleagues to hearings.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
Arrestable government for 48 in my name. And I do so as a former member, membership secretary of the NTE and then as a member of the National Association of Head Teachers. I can say it any better than Lord Hampton and Lord
22:40
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
than Lord Hampton and Lord Ashbourne. For me it's not an antiunion amendment, far from it is an equal opportunities issue where the teacher has the right to choose who they want to accompany them if hearing.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I very briefly rights to speak to this, simply because we have much the same debate as set in the Employment Rights Bill. And in the Employment Rights Bill debate on the
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I very briefly rights to speak to this, simply because we have much the same debate as set in the Employment Rights Bill. And in the Employment Rights Bill debate on the
22:40
Lord Leigh of Hurley (Conservative)
-
-
Lord Leigh of Hurley (Conservative)
Employment Rights Bill debate on the subject with Lord Katz explaining the government position, I did make the point that in my experience when people are in disciplinary procedures and meetings, my experience is that invariably, particularly young people, their preferred choice of person to accompany them as a parent. For obvious reasons. And I tried to put amendment into suggest that relatives would be allowed, whether or not they are professionally qualified, to accompany people in such circumstances.
In the heat of the Employment Rights Bill, got lost, but I would invite the Minister to consider whether or not a relative might be included as a professionally qualified person for this purpose.
In the heat of the Employment Rights Bill, got lost, but I would invite the Minister to consider whether or not a relative might be included as a professionally qualified person for this purpose.
22:41
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
Baroness Barran (Conservative)
I'm delighted to speak to amendment 448 in my name and support amendment 448.A in the names of the Noble Lords Lord Storey and Lord Hampton, to which I've added my name. Amendment 448 extends the freedoms that academies enjoy in relation to the conditions of their staff to maintain schools. I can't see a strong reason not to do this. Again trusting school leaders to make the right judgements for their team. My amendment is clear that schoolteachers pay and conditions document should act as a floor and not a ceiling in relation to teacher pay, and I was at this point like to acknowledge and thank the government for the important amendment they brought in the other place, which established this final point in relation to academies.
Turning to amendment 448.A, which has been already made a plea and nobly introduced by the Noble Lord Lord Hampton, the Noble Lords Lord Storey and my Noble Friend Lord Ashcombe, as are the Noble Lords of said, the amendment aims at fundamental fairness that all teachers should have the right to be accompanied by a certified companion, and of course teachers who are members of a trade union should feel well served by the representation that they pay for, and that is something that we welcome.
But I think it's also fair and reasonable to say that there would be some teachers who would choose not to join a union, whether it be for a whole range of reasons, including disagreements, strike action or potentially a unions political objectives. And obviously the Minister is very familiar with some of the demands from unions recently, and we had some of them tonight, including abolishing OFSTED or returning academies to local authority control. And I just think it's fair to say that some people could reasonably disagree.
So this amendment seeks to ensure that teachers who are not union members for whatever reason can be accompanied by a trained and certified companion commander would tidy up the existing situation where trained companions from organisations like eat apt are routinely admitted to hearings in schools, but they lack a right to do so legally and on occasion are refused by employers, and this amendment provides a mechanism to regularise the good practice that is already seen in the sector and ensure that it is spread equally.
I think it also has another spin-off benefit. The Noble Baroness the Minister will be aware, and I think my Noble Friend Lord Nash may have talked about it in the chamber, that schools are seeing an increasing number of complaints being generated by AIA. And of course complaints might be generated using an LLM, but they can't be resolved in the same way. So it is important to ensure workplace hearings are efficient and effective and keep pace with that.
I think very regrettable trend. I can't support amendment 447.A. The noble Lady is smiling. In surprise. I also spend some time writing to chairs in the good tradition set by my Noble Friend Lord Agnew. About the CEO and actually senior My points of disagreement with the noble Lady I think are in the how come I wouldn't disagree with her that this should be resolved through that this should be resolved through the STRB.
I would if I've done the maths right, it's late and I might have Mr zero, but I think even if we took the sixtysomething trusts that she mentioned and we knocked hundred thousand pounds of the salary of each CEO I think we would save the school system £6 million which is a lot of money but it's not a lot of money in the context of I think it's about 60 billion looking at the Minister to confirm. But I agree absolutely with the spirit of her amendment that public resources should be spent effectively and responsibly but I would urge the noble Lady and the Minister to focus on what to be fair are a very small minority of trusts but they spend very significant percentages of the school funding, their gag funding on the chief executive and the senior leadership team and the ones that I looked at actually there was no individual earning an eye-catching amount of money but combine they were taking significant percentages of funding the should be spent on people so we looked at non-teaching senior leaders and in some single Academy trusts, and as I said I don't want to exaggerate it but in a handful they were taking well over 10% of gag pooling so it was less about a big number and more about effective use of resources.
I think it's a genuine governance issue and I hope noble Lady agree Uzuni particularly as she rightly said when combined with educational underperformance I would defend underperformance I would defend those CEOs who are achieving extraordinary educational outcomes, I think on a per pupil basis we are talking about just a few pounds per pupil I wouldn't want to try and save money there and see those outcomes deteriorate. Without a bag to movement 448 in my name.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
We are turning now to the final group to the amendments in group 11 group to the amendments in group 11 which relate to teacher pay and conditions. Because 51 sports are commitment towards creating a
Turning to amendment 448.A, which has been already made a plea and nobly introduced by the Noble Lord Lord Hampton, the Noble Lords Lord Storey and my Noble Friend Lord Ashcombe, as are the Noble Lords of said, the amendment aims at fundamental fairness that all teachers should have the right to be accompanied by a certified companion, and of course teachers who are members of a trade union should feel well served by the representation that they pay for, and that is something that we welcome.
But I think it's also fair and reasonable to say that there would be some teachers who would choose not to join a union, whether it be for a whole range of reasons, including disagreements, strike action or potentially a unions political objectives. And obviously the Minister is very familiar with some of the demands from unions recently, and we had some of them tonight, including abolishing OFSTED or returning academies to local authority control. And I just think it's fair to say that some people could reasonably disagree.
So this amendment seeks to ensure that teachers who are not union members for whatever reason can be accompanied by a trained and certified companion commander would tidy up the existing situation where trained companions from organisations like eat apt are routinely admitted to hearings in schools, but they lack a right to do so legally and on occasion are refused by employers, and this amendment provides a mechanism to regularise the good practice that is already seen in the sector and ensure that it is spread equally.
I think it also has another spin-off benefit. The Noble Baroness the Minister will be aware, and I think my Noble Friend Lord Nash may have talked about it in the chamber, that schools are seeing an increasing number of complaints being generated by AIA. And of course complaints might be generated using an LLM, but they can't be resolved in the same way. So it is important to ensure workplace hearings are efficient and effective and keep pace with that.
I think very regrettable trend. I can't support amendment 447.A. The noble Lady is smiling. In surprise. I also spend some time writing to chairs in the good tradition set by my Noble Friend Lord Agnew. About the CEO and actually senior My points of disagreement with the noble Lady I think are in the how come I wouldn't disagree with her that this should be resolved through that this should be resolved through the STRB.
I would if I've done the maths right, it's late and I might have Mr zero, but I think even if we took the sixtysomething trusts that she mentioned and we knocked hundred thousand pounds of the salary of each CEO I think we would save the school system £6 million which is a lot of money but it's not a lot of money in the context of I think it's about 60 billion looking at the Minister to confirm. But I agree absolutely with the spirit of her amendment that public resources should be spent effectively and responsibly but I would urge the noble Lady and the Minister to focus on what to be fair are a very small minority of trusts but they spend very significant percentages of the school funding, their gag funding on the chief executive and the senior leadership team and the ones that I looked at actually there was no individual earning an eye-catching amount of money but combine they were taking significant percentages of funding the should be spent on people so we looked at non-teaching senior leaders and in some single Academy trusts, and as I said I don't want to exaggerate it but in a handful they were taking well over 10% of gag pooling so it was less about a big number and more about effective use of resources.
I think it's a genuine governance issue and I hope noble Lady agree Uzuni particularly as she rightly said when combined with educational underperformance I would defend underperformance I would defend those CEOs who are achieving extraordinary educational outcomes, I think on a per pupil basis we are talking about just a few pounds per pupil I wouldn't want to try and save money there and see those outcomes deteriorate. Without a bag to movement 448 in my name.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
We are turning now to the final group to the amendments in group 11 group to the amendments in group 11 which relate to teacher pay and conditions. Because 51 sports are commitment towards creating a
22:48
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Education) (Labour)
commitment towards creating a statutory pay floor, guaranteeing that all teachers in scope will not be offered pay a minimum level, giving all schools the flexibility to attract and retain the teachers they need. Turning to amendment 447 a in the name of my noble friend lady Boustead, can I this point as well say am very glad that we got to this group so that my noble friend was able to propose her amendment. She has been a stolid supporter of this debate, not just today but during committee and I recognise that an Thankur.
Her members as we've heard proposes extending the remit of the schoolteachers review body to include Academy trust Chief Executive officers. Can I say that we very much recognise and welcome that my noble friend expertise in education and note that she raises an extremely important point that we must ensure public money drives the best outcomes for children. And we do set very clear expectations for robust processes, and unjustifiable salaries when recruiting executives. Of course as we've heard from from Baroness Barran and in fact from my noble friend about the actions of Lord Agnew, maintaining that focus on value for money that is important I suspect for all noble Lords as part of this debate, furthermore for transparency and accountability the Department also engages with trust were executive pay is deemed an outlier, publishing the names on gov.uk.
I haven't due to my policy responsible to use, signed any letters or had any meetings without coffee as it appears have rightly happened, but I have no doubt that the department is maintaining the pressure to ensure as she rightly argues for, that money, public monies effectively spent and reflects improvements in standards the children rather than the interests of the leadership of trusts. I recognise that drive for action and I would like to reassure my noble friend that the Department as I say works with trusts that don't demonstrate value for money or improved pupil outcomes.
We will monitor our approach during proportionality and impact, we are keeping that under review. Amendment for for a table by Baroness Barran seeks to remove the statutory ceiling on teacher pay and allow maintained schools to depart from the teacher -- School Teachers Pay and Conditions Order. I thank the noble Lady which is in the spirit of what the causes are attempting to achieve, but there is a significant difference between our clause and what the noble Baronesses posing here.
We both agree on the importance of removing the pay ceiling, but it does not need to be on the face of the bill in order to achieve that. There is a well respected process through the education act 2002 which already provides for the Secretary of State to determine pay levels through set the secretary of education that's exactly what we intensity following Royal Assent in the statutory consultation process with usual school teachers review body process. The bill and our subsequent reforms to the conditions document will achieve the aim of creating a pay floor with no ceiling and increasing innovation for all schools.
Amendment 448 a table by Lord Storey seeks to expand teachers rights to be accompanied disciplinary or grievance meetings by representatives of professional bodies who are not trade unions. I do appreciate the concern of the noble Lord in raising and other noble Lords in raising this matter. As we have heard noble Lords are aware that the Department for Business and Trade is responsible for the policy in this area. In section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 already provides adequate protections in respect of the right to accompaniment for all workers, including teachers.
It is of course the case, and I am aware of the outcome of the vote at report stage of the Employment Rights Bill on a similar amendment tabled by Lord Palmer. And that the Department for Business and Trade will set out their latest position on that issue in due course. With regard to teacher specific -- teachers specifically, can I just say we believe that creating a separate statutory right for teachers separate to the process that I have just outlined covering all workers could raise concerns under the European can on human rights as it would treat them more favourably than other workers without clear justification and we therefore have no plans to amend the position for teachers.
These courses are about ensuring the Secretary of State has the right tools to uphold standards and protect pupils while also supporting the teaching profession through fair and consistent pay arrangements. I hope that given the assurances and additional information that I have provided noble Lords will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg leave to withdraw. Is it knowledge logic pleasure that the eminences withdrawn? Amendment by leave withdrawn. The question is that schedule three be question is that schedule three be the third schedule to the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Question is that clause 52 stand Question is that clause 52 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The the contrary, "Not content".
The "Contents" have it. Amendment 448 Baroness Barran not moved. Amendment
**** Possible New Speaker ****
448 a Lord Storey not moved. I beg to move that the House be resumed.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
resumed. The question is that the House be resumed. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have "Not content". The "Contents" have I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.
Her members as we've heard proposes extending the remit of the schoolteachers review body to include Academy trust Chief Executive officers. Can I say that we very much recognise and welcome that my noble friend expertise in education and note that she raises an extremely important point that we must ensure public money drives the best outcomes for children. And we do set very clear expectations for robust processes, and unjustifiable salaries when recruiting executives. Of course as we've heard from from Baroness Barran and in fact from my noble friend about the actions of Lord Agnew, maintaining that focus on value for money that is important I suspect for all noble Lords as part of this debate, furthermore for transparency and accountability the Department also engages with trust were executive pay is deemed an outlier, publishing the names on gov.uk.
I haven't due to my policy responsible to use, signed any letters or had any meetings without coffee as it appears have rightly happened, but I have no doubt that the department is maintaining the pressure to ensure as she rightly argues for, that money, public monies effectively spent and reflects improvements in standards the children rather than the interests of the leadership of trusts. I recognise that drive for action and I would like to reassure my noble friend that the Department as I say works with trusts that don't demonstrate value for money or improved pupil outcomes.
We will monitor our approach during proportionality and impact, we are keeping that under review. Amendment for for a table by Baroness Barran seeks to remove the statutory ceiling on teacher pay and allow maintained schools to depart from the teacher -- School Teachers Pay and Conditions Order. I thank the noble Lady which is in the spirit of what the causes are attempting to achieve, but there is a significant difference between our clause and what the noble Baronesses posing here.
We both agree on the importance of removing the pay ceiling, but it does not need to be on the face of the bill in order to achieve that. There is a well respected process through the education act 2002 which already provides for the Secretary of State to determine pay levels through set the secretary of education that's exactly what we intensity following Royal Assent in the statutory consultation process with usual school teachers review body process. The bill and our subsequent reforms to the conditions document will achieve the aim of creating a pay floor with no ceiling and increasing innovation for all schools.
Amendment 448 a table by Lord Storey seeks to expand teachers rights to be accompanied disciplinary or grievance meetings by representatives of professional bodies who are not trade unions. I do appreciate the concern of the noble Lord in raising and other noble Lords in raising this matter. As we have heard noble Lords are aware that the Department for Business and Trade is responsible for the policy in this area. In section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 already provides adequate protections in respect of the right to accompaniment for all workers, including teachers.
It is of course the case, and I am aware of the outcome of the vote at report stage of the Employment Rights Bill on a similar amendment tabled by Lord Palmer. And that the Department for Business and Trade will set out their latest position on that issue in due course. With regard to teacher specific -- teachers specifically, can I just say we believe that creating a separate statutory right for teachers separate to the process that I have just outlined covering all workers could raise concerns under the European can on human rights as it would treat them more favourably than other workers without clear justification and we therefore have no plans to amend the position for teachers.
These courses are about ensuring the Secretary of State has the right tools to uphold standards and protect pupils while also supporting the teaching profession through fair and consistent pay arrangements. I hope that given the assurances and additional information that I have provided noble Lords will feel able to withdraw their amendments.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
I beg leave to withdraw. Is it knowledge logic pleasure that the eminences withdrawn? Amendment by leave withdrawn. The question is that schedule three be question is that schedule three be the third schedule to the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Question is that clause 52 stand Question is that clause 52 stand part of the bill. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The the contrary, "Not content".
The "Contents" have it. Amendment 448 Baroness Barran not moved. Amendment
**** Possible New Speaker ****
448 a Lord Storey not moved. I beg to move that the House be resumed.
**** Possible New Speaker ****
resumed. The question is that the House be resumed. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have "Not content". The "Contents" have I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.