Education and Inspections Bill

I thank the Minister for his response to my amendment and the others in the group. I reiterate that the purpose of our AmendmentNo. 1 was to strengthen the commitment to high standards of education and the promotion of the potential of every child attending our schools. Again, I stress that I was talking about educational potential, not necessarily academic attainment, which can mean different things for different children. We would support what the Government are trying to achieve in a holistic way. Perhaps it was the reference to primary duties that led the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, to pull me up on this. Perhaps I should not have used the words ““primary duties””, but I did so to try to add weight to the emphasis on the need for high standards and fulfilment of educational potential. The important thing is to try to shift the duty on schools to achieve that potential. Let us remember that, under this Bill and certainly beginning with the White Paper, the local education authority is supposed to be the commissioner not the provider. A solid duty is being placed on local education authorities to promote high standards and the fulfilment of potential, and to ensure that it is the school which carries out that duty and produces high standards and achieves fulfilment of potential among its pupils. That is the purpose behind our amendment. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, for articulating rather better than I the need for clarity in the phrase ““fair access””. It concerns us, not least because the proposed new Section 13A(1)(c) mentioned in Clause 1 covers the issue of fair access, in requiring all children to have the chance to succeed and their educational potential fulfilled. Fair access is a necessary component of that goal and one could argue that to have the phrase in the Bill is otiose. Following on from the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, will the Minister consider writing to us on, or mentioning later this evening, the possibility of noble Lords seeing a draft of the regulations spelling out the definition of ““fair access””? For now, however, I thank the Minister. I accept his explanation of why the word ““person”” is not sensible, in that he wants to ensure that there is clear consistency with other Acts and the holistic approach to education, so we must stick with ““children””. I will have a tough time explaining that to my children tonight. On that basis, however, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 2 not moved.] Clause 1 [Duties in relation to high standards and the fulfilment of potential]: