My Lords, I am delighted that we are now moving on to debating the establishment of Ofqual. I would always be delighted to take lessons from a maiden aunt; I would love to have one. I was interested in the remarks of the noble Baronesses, Lady Walmsley and Lady Verma. I am grateful also to the noble Lords, Lord Sutherland and Lord Ramsbotham, for their words of wisdom. We are very privileged in this Committee to have such a wealth of experience and knowledge to draw on in our deliberations.
I am glad, although not surprised, that there has been such a widespread welcome in the Committee for the establishment of Ofqual in this opening debate on Part 7. That welcome has been given outside the House, too.
Qualifications are at the heart of the education and skills system. They recognise and reward achievements for young people as they complete their full-time education. They are central also for adults looking to strengthen their vocational skills. As the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, reminded us, a qualification’s currency is its credibility. Ofqual will need to be independent to give credibility to the qualifications it regulates, which is what the legislation is all about. The Bill provides for Ofqual to be a robustly independent regulator, which, as the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, made so clear, is essential.
The most important aspects of Ofqual’s independence relate to its powers and accountability, and how it uses those powers in practice. We will no doubt debate those later, but we will start by looking at appointments. I begin by tackling head-on the question implicitly—perhaps explicitly—voiced by a number of these amendments on whether Ofqual’s independence is affected by the responsibility of the Secretary of State for appointing ordinary members of Ofqual. The answer is no, for three reasons. First, the experience of Ofsted shows us that having a board appointed by the Secretary of State is entirely consistent with a reputation for fierce independence. Anyone reading the media today and hearing the news about serious case reviews, which I am sure we will discuss later, will recognise how fiercely independent Ofsted is. That is why Ofsted was our starting point when developing the governance arrangements for Ofqual.
Secondly, we intend that these will be public appointments regulated by the Commissioner for Public Appointments. That is not the same as appointments being selected by the Secretary of State. The overriding principle will be selection on merit. From the first public advertisement to the announcement of the names of those appointed, the whole appointment process will be open and transparent. Thirdly, once appointed, Ofqual members must ensure that Ofqual is run in accordance with its objectives. They are not in any way answerable to the Secretary of State. Any Secretary of State who thought that he or she could "fix" Ofqual through some canny appointments would be sorely disappointed.
The appointments to Ofqual will be highly significant. We will be looking for a rich mix of tough, independent-minded people with the skills to give Ofqual the leadership that it needs to develop into an independent, credible and authoritative regulator. The fact that they are Secretary of State appointments reflects and reinforces the importance of these roles. It is important to say that Ofqual will have to have procedures in place for declaring and managing any conflicts of interest, as a matter of good governance and because it would be at risk of legal challenge if decisions were not impartial. So while the amendment proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, on conflicts of interest raises important questions, I hope that I can reassure her, by giving a little more detail, that it is unnecessary.
It is important that members of Ofqual should not be subject to conflicts of interest. In particular, it would clearly be inappropriate to appoint to Ofqual anyone with a direct and current connection with an awarding body which Ofqual might regulate. However, there will be arrangements in place to prevent conflicts of interest, with a register of interests, protocols about what to declare and all the usual procedures associated with good corporate governance as well as those associated with being a government department. However, there are many things that, to quote from Amendment 220A, might be "regarded" by some, ""as constituting a conflict of interest with","
Ofqual’s objectives. Some people might regard a head teacher as having a conflict of interest, but let me say emphatically that I do not believe that that would be the case. What matters most to head teachers, like the rest of us, is that confidence in the system is high, through robust regulations. I absolutely agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, that we need to be clear about conflicts of interest, but I believe that proper systems, processes and declarations will be in place to ensure that they are properly managed.
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 15 October 2009.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
713 c376-8 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:14:29 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_584637
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_584637
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_584637