Education and Inspections Bill

My Lords, I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this significant Bill, and wish to associate myself with the remarks made by my friend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Peterborough, particularly about the Church’s interest in education from the point of view of Church schools. I detect in your Lordships’ House a little unnecessary fear about faith schools. I expect that the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, may touch on that when he speaks, and I am sure that we shall explore it more fully in Committee. I want to look at the Bill from the point of view of the Church’s commitment to the general interest. The Church of England’s interest in education has never, I believe, been narrow or partisan. The noble Lord, Lord Baker, alluded to that and acknowledged it, as, indeed, did the noble Baroness, Lady Flather. When the mass system of education in this country was founded by the Churches, the objects of the National Society, the Church of England’s charitable vehicle for this work, were the education of the poor in the principles of the established Church throughout England and Wales. I would be the first to admit that we would not express it that way now. But it means education for all, including the most disadvantaged in our society, and education firmly founded on Christian beliefs and values. That remains the Church of England’s commitment. This naturally means that the Church is concerned not only with Church schools but has a real interest in the education offered in every school in the land. While there are schools with a particular religious character, the majority of which the Church of England is proud of having provided, we do not recognise any school as having a secular character. In all schools and for all pupils where their parents do not exercise their right of withdrawal, religious education and collective worship must have an important place, making as they do a major contribution to the purposes of education, as defined in law: the spiritual, moral, social, mental and physical development of pupils and of society. For that reason the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Portsmouth was recently one of the signatories with other Church leaders of a letter to the Secretary of State, inviting the Government to give greater emphasis to the training needs of teachers and school leaders in their role in organising and leading collective worship in schools. I noted the Minister’s emphasis on standards in teacher training. That is also why concern has been expressed at the lack of mention of religious education in Part 5. The subjects mentioned in that part are the basic entitlement in the national curriculum for all pupils, and are to be maintained in a more flexible curriculum for pupils aged over 14. It is understood that religious education is not part of the national curriculum, but with the national curriculum it forms the basic school curriculum. However, it would be a matter of major concern—not just for the Churches—if RE, which is increasingly popular where it is well taught, and which is making a major contribution to mutual understanding in our often troubled society, fell out of the school experience for those pupils pursuing a vocational pathway. This is particularly acute in relation to pupils who may go on to further education, where, to our continuing concern, there is no requirement in law that colleges promote the spiritual and moral development of their students. The Diocesan Boards of Education Measure 1991 requires Church of England diocesan boards of education to promote good-quality religious education and collective worship in all schools within the diocese in question. This has led in a number of dioceses to schemes for association or affiliation between community schools and the diocese. Without becoming Church schools, such affiliated schools have the benefit of the advice and support of the diocesan advisers, and the fellowship and comradeship of their neighbouring Church schools. In some cases this has gone further. In my own diocese, we are particularly proud of the support that a highly successful and oversubscribed Church of England secondary school in Nottingham has been able to give—not only to a new Church of England secondary school in the city, which was founded following the advice of the review conducted five years ago by the noble Lord, Lord Dearing; it has also given the same assistance and partnership to a neighbouring community school. Such developments will be facilitated by the provisions relating to trust-based foundation schools. Church of England dioceses stand ready to engage with and support a new network of schools without a religious character, but which nevertheless take seriously their obligations in the spiritual and moral development of their pupils in religious education and collective worship. Where possible we should like to do so in association with other partners. In some cases these partners might be long established, in others new or local. I am particularly pleased at indications that such partnerships might be possible with our colleagues in the Roman Catholic Church. It would be wonderful if they could also be developed with other religious groups, faith communities or business partners. There have been some encouraging conversations to that end. Such strong partnerships would also be able to bring in the more fragile local partnerships of perhaps parents or community groups. We envisage multi-partner trust schools, in which Churches and Church schools would play their part. We see that as an enticing prospect. Finally, I turn to Part 7, dealing with the problems that schools and society face with disaffected and troubled young people. They are often a great worry and heartache to their parents and families. The Bill contains provisions about the duties of parents and school discipline. I endorse the need for these provisions. They seem broadly suitable, but they do not go to the root. They may help to solve the effects of disaffection, but that is not enough. The causes go deeper and there are steps that the Government can take which, in the medium term at least, would reduce the problem. The recent report of a commission on urban life and faith established by the most reverend Primates the Archbishops of Canterbury and of York, Faithful Cities, discussed in advance in a debate in your Lordships’ House on 19 May, recommended that:"““Government and faith communities must give new consideration to the informal education of young people””." The report recognised four implications of the recommendation. First, the statutory nature of the youth service must be reinstated and properly funded by local authorities. Secondly, key worker status must be given to youth work practitioners, so that they can be recruited and, most importantly, retained in urban areas. Thirdly, the spiritual well-being of young people must be an essential part of the Youth Matters strategy and implementation. Fourthly, young people’s councils of faith should be developed and resourced to build respect and encourage participation in civic society. I hope that the Government recognise the opportunity in this Bill to give statutory recognition to the importance of the youth service and the sad fact that, in many local authorities, appropriate provision is in decline. If not, I fear that the other measures in Part 7 could have less effect than they deserve.