Amendment No. 126, which stands in my name, refers to Clause 33. Many Church schools—and probably not only Church schools—already have organisations supporting the school with all kinds of exotic and local names. I am fully supportive of the involvement of parents; I hope that we all share that view. What these groups have in common is that they include friends of the school and members of the local church and community, as well as parents and staff connected with the school. That is a good thing and it is to be encouraged.
The wording of Clause 33 is exclusive. Members of these parent councils are parents and no one else. By amending that to ““include”” parents, AmendmentNo. 126 seeks to clarify the point that these friends’ organisations could perfectly well fulfil the purpose of a parent council. For many schools, having two separate bodies would be ridiculous and unnecessary. The clause as drafted would have the effect, therefore, of destroying a local system that often works well to the advantage of the school and the community. I hope that the Government will reconsider the phrasing of the clause.
Education and Inspections Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Bishop of Peterborough
(Bishops (affiliation))
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 18 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 c1230 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 09:57:04 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338616
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338616
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338616