Like other speakers, when I read the White Paper I was profoundly depressed. The expression that came to mind then was one that I had often used when I witnessed in opposition the attempts of the Conservative Government to divide and dismantle our education system. I used to say that they were creating an educational archipelago. We all know what can happen in archipelagos. People can lose their way, and those who find a better island in their travels can be sure that it has already been occupied. Of course, as Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s ““The Gulag Archipelago”” showed us, people can lose their life opportunities if they lose their way and are stranded in an archipelago. I need not develop the image further, which can apply to a divided education system.
However, I am much encouraged by the Bill before us. I am encouraged by the tightening of the provisions on admissions, by the proposals for 14 to 19-year-olds in part 5, and particularly by clause 149, which we could call the ““Knowsley model””. That model was pioneered in Knowsley and we are proud to have made that contribution to the development of education policy. I am also encouraged by clause 17, which looks promising and deals with another area in which Knowsley has been in the vanguard of delivering the Government’s policies. It is certainly in tune with ““Every Child Matters””.
On co-operation between schools and the sharing and dissemination of good practice, we in Knowsley have a philosophy and policy of corporate entrepreneurship. It works well, and there is a commonality between politicians, administrators, head teachers and teachers. All are concerned that this philosophy should not be undermined by the intrusion of the individual entrepreneurship of school trusts—a danger intrinsic in this Bill but, I hope, one that can be avoided. Rather than a rigid model based on individual schools, we want trusts to be developed in a local context, not spanning local authority boundaries, but perhaps including several schools being federated in trusts. Such co-operation is the spirit, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Mr. Raynsford) said, of the ““Every Child Matters”” agenda—a spirit that consciously aligns with other Bills before the House on child care and vulnerable children.
The agenda that we in Knowsley espouse is an holistic one. It is no accident that the title of ““director of education”” in Knowsley has been replaced by ““director of children’s services””, thereby indicating this systemic, inclusive, corporate and holistic agenda. I seek assurance from the Government that that agenda will be allowed to prosper once the Bill is enacted. I am encouraged by earlier remarks by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, both in the House and outside, that that might be the case and that there is the possibility of a strengthened role for the local authority—certainly more strengthened than I feared after reading the White Paper. I am also encouraged by my right hon. Friend’s assurances that there will be close discussion in Committee in an effort to improve the Bill, including the criteria to enable successful local authorities to perform that appropriately strengthened role. I agree that one size should not necessarily fit all, and that applies to local authorities as well as to schools. I am optimistic that the Government now recognise that.
Clauses 7 and 9 will allow local authorities to propose new community or community special schools, subject to the consent of the Secretary of State. As the clauses stand, it appears that my right hon. Friend still feels unable to trust local authorities to run schools, even if they have a track record of success. Knowsley has established its credentials, demonstrated by its early selection for funding support for the building schools for the future programme, a system-wide reform in a local authority context. At the end of this month, all Knowsley secondary schools will be closed and replaced with eight learning centres—the name reflects the holistic, inclusive ethos that I have already mentioned. The Bill, if appropriately framed, will provide a perfect opportunity for us in Knowsley to maximise the implementation of federated trusts—indeed, in a local authority the size of Knowsley, possibly one federated Knowsley trust.
I make no apology for putting my remarks in the context of my home borough, which I am proud to represent. I have devoted more than half of my adult life to the education service in Knowsley and I want to see it improved, not damaged. I am optimistic that we can work with the Government to achieve that.
Other local authorities are thinking along similar lines to Knowsley. In some cases, they are even taking leads from Knowsley. I put it to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State that when the detail of the Bill is considered in Committee she should not lose sight of the guiding principles, which I have mentioned several times, of inclusion, holism—I do not mind ““isms””—and corporate enterprise. In Knowsley, we believe in sharing our problems and our opportunities. I usually manage to quote one of the Latin poets in my speeches, so I shall finish with a quotation from Horace, who said:"““Nam tua res agitur paries cum proximus ardet””."
If the person next door’s party wall is on fire, it is your problem too.
Education and Inspections Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Edward O'Hara
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 15 March 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Education and Inspections Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
443 c1506-8 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:04:10 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_308595
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_308595
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_308595