Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will make an assessment of the average number of tuition hours not accessed by university students as a result of strike action by university staff in the last year; whether her Department issues guidance to (a) universities and (b) students on reimbursement of (i) fees and (ii) other costs for tuition hours not accessed by students as a result of (A) strikes and (B) other factors affecting the delivery of academic services by the university; what data her Department holds on the reimbursement of such costs to students by universities in such cases; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Robert Halfon
Compensating students for disruption is the responsibility of higher education (HE) providers, which are independent from government.
The Office for Students (OfS) has made clear that they expect universities to abide by the conditions of registration, maintain the delivery of HE and minimise disruption to students in the event of any industrial action. The OfS has also highlighted providers’ obligations under consumer protection law in relation to the impact of industrial action.
The OfS have wide-ranging powers to ensure that students’ interests are protected, and they expect providers to do all they can to avoid disruption to students.
The OfS’s powers include the ability to impose one or more specific ongoing conditions of registration, impose a monetary penalty, refuse to renew a provider’s access and participation plan, suspend aspects of a provider’s registration, vary or revoke a provider's authorisation for degree awarding powers, revoke a provider’s authorisation to use ‘university’ in its title, or deregister a provider.
The OfS has advised HE providers that, in the event of disruption caused by industrial action, students may be entitled to repeated learning opportunities or tuition fee refunds. These remedies are determined by the contents of the provider-student contract, as well as relevant consumer protection law.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of recent representations submitted to his Department by the Association of Colleges on (a) pay differentials between schoolteachers and further education lecturers, (b) changes to workloads relating to potential grade inflation and changes to sixth-form student numbers resulting from exam cancellations and (c) the availability of shared funding for approved capital projects.
Answered by Alex Burghart - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
Setting pay rates for lecturers in further education (FE) is the responsibility of colleges and the department plays no role in this process. However, we recognise that the department’s funding does affect college finances and, therefore, pay decisions. We will make available an additional £1.6 billion for 16-19 education in the 2024/25 financial year compared with the 2021/22 financial year. This is in addition to the £291 million extra funding for 16-19 education in the 2021/22 financial year, and the £400 million that the department provided in the 2020/21 financial year. We will be investing nearly £52 million in the FE Workforce in the 2022/23 financial year, to continue to support the FE sector with the recruitment, retention, and development of teachers. This includes bursaries worth up to £26,000 each tax-free, which are available to support FE teacher training in priority subject areas for the 2022/23 academic year.
We recognise that arrangements for GCSEs during the COVID-19 pandemic have contributed toa fall in student numbers for some providers and an increase for others. We increased the funding rates to colleges and other providers in the 2022/23 financial year, which will cushion the impact on allocations for institutions with falling student numbers.
We are aware of the challenges facing capital projects across different types of education providers. Many colleges who have approved bids for capital funding will also be contributing match funding towards their projects, and it is for colleges to manage their projects within the budget available. We will monitor progress across all college projects.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what his policy is on the acceptance of large donations by University colleges from foreign billionaires closely linked with regimes with poor human rights records; how that policy would apply to the proposed acceptance by Linacre College, Oxford of £155 million from a billionaire based in Vietnam, with close links to the Vietnamese government; and what recommendation his Department will make to the Privy Council on whether Linacre College should be permitted to rename itself after the Chairwoman of the company making the donation as a condition of receiving the money.
Answered by Michelle Donelan - Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology
The security guidelines, commissioned at my request and published by Universities UK in October 2020, entitled ‘Managing risks in internationalisation: security-related issues’, advise universities on engaging in secure international collaborations. This includes a recommendation that due diligence should be conducted on all international partnerships, including donations. Universities due diligence processes should consider reputational, ethical and security risks. As autonomous institutions, universities will have their own fundraising and gift acceptance policies in place.
In line with the offer that the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office extends to all organisations and businesses looking to work with Vietnamese entities, Linacre College and the University of Oxford have received background information, at their request, on working with Vietnamese entities.
If the Privy Council asks the department for advice, we will consider the case based on the facts before us.
As my right hon Friend, the Secretary of State for Education, has recently stated, we intend to further explore the issues raised in the proposed Report Stage amendment to the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill, seeking to introduce transparency and public reporting of foreign donations to universities.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will take steps to review the criteria applied by the Family Court system according to which an infant, fathered by a UK care-home employee on a woman admitted as an inpatient under section, will be sent to live in Africa, with the father's parents, while Police investigations continue into whether the care-home employee has committed a serious criminal offence in impregnating the mother in his care; whether she will examine the legal process according to which the relocation of an infant to a developing country, under such circumstances, is deemed to be preferable to directing that the child be brought up by (a) members of the mother's family or (b) adoptive parents in the United Kingdom; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Will Quince
The Department for Education is responding given its responsibility for the policy and guidelines around local authority care proceedings. The department is unable to comment on any criminal matters.
Whilst the Department for Education cannot intervene in individual cases, this government wants every child to be in a stable, loving home that is right for them. The paramount consideration of the family court when making any decision is the child’s welfare.
On the points regarding the criteria applied by the family court system and the legal process in place, in all cases, a court will independently assess and carefully scrutinise all the evidence before any decision is made. Separate scrutiny by the child’s court appointed guardian will also be applied to ensure that the child’s interests and views are properly represented. Where local authorities are considering removing a child from their birth parents, it will consider all options available that are in the child’s best interest, including placing the child with other family members in England or abroad.
This government believes the best place for a child to thrive is with their family. However, after all options are explored and it is concluded that this is not in the child’s best interest, adoption can be considered. The court will consider all of the evidence before it, and where further information is needed to make a judgment about a child’s placement, they will instruct the local authority to explore this. The court will only make a judgment when it is satisfied that its decision is in the child’s best interest.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether it is his policy that (a) the prohibition in schools of the promotion of partisan political views in the teaching of any subject set out in s.406(1)(b) of the Education Act 1996 continues to apply to (i) local education authorities, (ii) school governors and (iii) headteachers and (b) that prohibition includes attempts to introduce critical race theory into schools; what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of enforcement of education legislation, by authority; and if he will take steps to ensure that schools in Brighton and Hove comply with statutory bans on the political indoctrination of schoolchildren.
Answered by Robin Walker
Schools are free to include a full range of issues, ideas and appropriate materials in their teaching, even where they are challenging and controversial. They can teach about contested views on race in a factual manner, acknowledging different opinions, just as pupils are often taught about a range of opposing and contested views on other topics. They should not, however, teach contested theories or opinions as fact.
Political impartiality in our education system is an incredibly important principle to uphold. We are working with the sector to develop guidance which will help schools understand and meet their duties in this area. This guidance will support schools to teach about complex political issues, in line with their legal duties on political impartiality.
Legal requirements on political impartiality in schools fall specifically on local authorities, governing bodies, academy trust leadership (including senior managers and academy trustees) and, in the case of maintained schools and academies, headteachers.
Where there are concerns about what is being taught, we expect that, in most instances, these can be addressed through dialogue and agreement, and simple steps can be taken to resolve any issues.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if he will make it his policy (a) that the costs of any court action against (i) educational establishments and (ii) student unions which are found to have failed to protect freedom of speech are borne by the Government and not the individual; and (b) to permit withdrawal, under his direction, of public funding from such establishments.
Answered by Michelle Donelan - Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology
The new Office for Students (OfS) complaints scheme to be established by the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill will provide an accessible, cost-free route for individuals to complain against a registered higher education provider or students’ union, where they have suffered adverse consequences as a result of a breach of the new freedom of speech and academic freedom duties. The government expects that the vast majority of complainants will choose this route before considering going to court, as there are no costs involved in bringing a complaint.
Individuals will also have the right to seek damages in the courts. If a provider or students’ union is found by the courts to have breached their duties, the court may order that they pay the costs of the claimant.
The OfS will have the power to issue sanctions to higher education providers where there has been a breach of the new freedom of speech registration conditions (which require compliance with the new duties). These include financial penalties, as well as suspension and the ultimate sanction of de-registration, effectively depriving the provider of access to public funds. The OfS will also be able to issue monetary penalties against students’ unions found to be in breach of their freedom of speech duties.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if he will list (a) any powers he has to prevent investment in UK universities by hostile states and (b) the legal basis for each of those powers.
Answered by Michelle Donelan - Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology
We are recognised across the world for our higher education system and we encourage the sector to collaborate with international partners. However, to be open, we must also be secure, and we will not accept collaborations which compromise our national security.
On the 29 April 2021, the National Security and Investment (NSI) Act was passed. The NSI Act enables the UK Government to protect all sectors, including research and Higher Education Institutions from hostile foreign interference through mandating notification and requiring approval of investments and other acquisitions in key areas. It also extends the UK Government’s screening powers to include acquisitions of control over assets such as intellectual and tangible property. Universities and other research organisations should have regard to the NSI Act when collaborating with other parties to acquire, sell or develop entities and assets.
In addition, I commissioned Universities UK to produce comprehensive security guidelines to advise universities on engaging in secure international collaborations published in October 2020, ‘Managing risks in internationalisation: security-related issues’. Among the recommendations in the guidelines were that due diligence be conducted on all international partnerships.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
If he will take steps with Cabinet colleagues to assist Afghan scholars who have been validated by the Council for At-Risk Academics to take up their sponsored posts offered by universities in the UK.
Answered by Gavin Williamson
The government is committed to providing protection for vulnerable people fleeing Afghanistan, including Afghan students and scholars. In its first year, the Afghan citizens’ resettlement scheme will welcome up to 5,000 vulnerable Afghans to the UK, who have been forced to flee the country, with up to a total of 20,000 in the long-term. Further details will be announced in due course.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment he has made of the of the compatibility of recent advice issued to schools by a campaigning organisation not to refer to children as (a) boys and (b) girls and the prohibition on political indoctrination in schools.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The Department trusts schools to make sensible and reasonable decisions to determine what is best for their pupils. It is important that schools take full responsibility for ensuring their teaching is age appropriate, suitable, and politically impartial, particularly when using materials produced by external organisations. The Department does not generally comment on external materials or advise schools on which specific resources to use. In September 2020, as part of the package of support for the implementation of Relationship, Sex and Health Education, the Department produced non-statutory guidance, which includes some general principles to help schools choose the right resources. This is available to view here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/plan-your-relationships-sex-and-health-curriculum.
The law is clear that schools must remain politically impartial. Schools must not promote partisan political views and should ensure the balanced treatment of political issues. The Department is developing further guidance to support schools to understand and meet their duties in this area.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment he has made of whether the recent teaching materials issued to primary schools by the National Association of Teachers of Religious Education is in breach of the prohibition on political propaganda in the classroom; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The law is clear that schools must remain politically impartial. Head teachers and staff have a responsibility to ensure that they act appropriately, particularly in the political views they express. When political issues are discussed, schools must offer pupils a balanced presentation of opposing views and should not present materials in a politically biased or one sided way.
Schools should not teach contested theory or opinions as fact and must ensure they uphold their duties with regard to political impartiality. Schools should be mindful of the need to offer a balanced presentation of opposing views as well as the age appropriateness of teaching, given that balanced treatment of such issues may not be possible with younger pupils.
Political impartiality in our education system is an important principle to uphold. The Department is developing further guidance to support schools to understand and meet their duties in this area.