13 John Leech debates involving the Department for Education

Oral Answers to Questions

John Leech Excerpts
Monday 7th February 2011

(13 years, 8 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sarah Teather Portrait Sarah Teather
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman and I discussed this matter in detail when he introduced an Adjournment debate last week. I stand by my statement. Similarly, the council has a legal duty to consult before closing, opening or restructuring in its area. I am sure that it is in the middle of that consultation at the moment, and that parents will make their views very clear.

John Leech Portrait Mr John Leech (Manchester, Withington) (LD)
- Hansard - -

T8. Can the Secretary of State assure me that changes to education maintenance allowance will not leave college students disadvantaged compared with school sixth-formers, who will still be entitled to free school meals?

Michael Gove Portrait Michael Gove
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That point is well made by my hon. Friend. We have an anomaly at the moment, whereby the position of those in colleges and those in schools is not the same. The whole thrust of our policy making has been to try to ensure a level playing field between schools and colleges. The point he makes with respect to EMA weighs heavily with my colleagues and me.

Oral Answers to Questions

John Leech Excerpts
Thursday 14th October 2010

(14 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Vince Cable Portrait Vince Cable
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I have always enjoyed joining the hon. Gentleman in the Division Lobby, and I have done so on many occasions. I have also enjoyed his humour. If he had followed my writings as closely as he claims to have done, he would have realised that I was advocating the introduction of private capital into Royal Mail about six years ago.

John Leech Portrait Mr John Leech (Manchester, Withington) (LD)
- Hansard - -

Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies suggests that the poorest 30% of graduates would pay less than they do now if the Browne review were to be implemented. However, potential students do not automatically assume that they are going to be among the bottom 30%, so any increase in tuition fees would surely be a disincentive for them to apply to go to university, even if they would ultimately be better off.

Lord Willetts Portrait Mr Willetts
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We can see from the evidence that the introduction of fees by the previous Labour Government did not have the effect that many people in all parts of the House feared. In reality, we have seen an increase in the number of applications from students from poorer backgrounds, because they knew that they would not have to pay up-front fees. That key feature of the system would be maintained under Lord Browne’s proposals.

Academies Bill [Lords]

John Leech Excerpts
Monday 26th July 2010

(14 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nick Gibb Portrait Mr Gibb
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Yes, my hon. Friend makes a very good point. The type of people who become school governors are motivated by one issue only—the school of which they are governors; they want to raise standards and are concerned about that school.

Several amendments—including amendments 78, 77, 9 and 86—would require the governing body of a maintained school to consult on their proposals to become an academy before applying for an academy order. Clause 5 requires, as I have said, that the governing body of the school

“must consult such persons as they think appropriate”

on the proposed conversion. The consultation may take place before or after an application for an academy order has been made in respect of the school or after an academy order has been granted. This will allow each school to determine when it has sufficient information on which to consult and at what point during the application process it wishes to do so. Schools are, after all, in the best position to determine when and how consultation should best take place, and they may not want to approach parents or others until they have firm proposals.

The only requirement is that the consultation must be held before the funding agreement is signed, since at that point the school will be legally committed to the conversion process. Academy orders, though a step along the way, are not irreversible and we therefore believe that there is still value in a school consulting after an order has been made. At that point, the school is in no sense bound to convert, so it is not the case that any consultation of parents or others would either be not meaningful or too late, as the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker) suggested it would be in last week’s debate.

--- Later in debate ---
John Leech Portrait Mr Leech
- Hansard - -

I thank the Minister. I seek some clarification of the provision he cited, which makes reference to consulting “such persons”. Does he assume that “such persons” would include the parent body of the school?

Nick Gibb Portrait Mr Gibb
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Of course, and it is up to the school to decide. I was going to come on to the guidance later. It is published on the departmental website and it sets out precisely what guidance the governing bodies should adhere to. It states:

“It will be for the Governing Body of the school to determine who should be consulted, although schools should consider involving local bodies or groups who have strong links with the school.”

It sets out various elements such as: information on the school’s website, a letter to all parents explaining the proposal, a meeting for parents, a newsletter for parents and asking for views from parents to be sent in writing to the school.