I also support the intention behind these amendments. I shall not attempt to repeat the eloquence of so many speakers around the Floor. The Committee clearly regards this as important. I simply ask a question of logic in supporting, for example, Amendment No. 24. Clause 4—which I warmly welcome—imposes a duty to identify children not receiving an education. The logic is that, if we were to go to the primary care trust and give a duty to identify ill people, we stop there. The point is that they should be treated and supported medically. Similarly, there is surely a duty and responsibility lying somewhere—and if not with the local authority, where?—for those needing support, having been identified as not receiving adequate education.
Education and Inspections Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Sutherland of Houndwood
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 12 July 2006.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Education and Inspections Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c733-4 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-16 20:58:30 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_336748
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_336748
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_336748