Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill

My Lords, we are broadly in favour of these clauses and the role which they give the local commissioner. I think most would agree that it is very important to empower parents with due knowledge, understanding and control over what happens to their children at school. We should also acknowledge that it is useful, indeed necessary, to have some fixed process by which complaints can be made and addressed. At the moment, complaints which cannot be satisfied by the governing body of a school go directly to the Secretary of State, which is impractical and unnecessary. Nevertheless, as we have made clear time and time again, it is crucial that the rights and hard work of teachers are not dismissed. Any complaints system, by its very nature, is bound to be messy. This is even more true of a system which will come into force only when the complaint has risen above the level of the school’s governing body. Many factors have to be taken into account and the decision will not always be easy, nor will it always seem fair. It is therefore important to begin with a system which seems to strike the right balance between the rights of the parents, the rights of the pupil and the rights of the teachers. Teachers must be allowed to exert their authority and should have the power to enforce school rules without constant second-guessing. We on these Benches think it is crucial that our teachers are afforded the professional respect they deserve. To this end, we have tabled Amendment 285, which would mean that any decision taken to enforce the published school rules cannot be taken to the local commissioner and waste his valuable time. The school rules are there for all to see and, within the context of the school, surely it is right that teachers should be able to take proportionate action to enforce them. Does the Minister accept that we must trust the professionalism and expertise of our teachers to be able to do this? It may be that there are specific instances where a bad decision is made and action needs to be taken by parents. But in those circumstances, is the Minister saying that the only way of taking these specific complaints forward would be through the local commissioner? Our concern is that without narrowing the remit of complaints, teachers will not be able to impose the discipline which they need in order to get on with their main job of teaching. We accept that there is a balance to be found. Parents and pupils should have the right to complain against improper actions, but teachers must be allowed to impose discipline. We are concerned that without the proviso of being able to enforce the school rules, the Government are attempting to legislate against the professionalism of the many because of the impropriety of a few. Is existing legislation in place to deal with those who abuse the powers given to them to enforce the school rules? For the rest, does she agree that we should extend professional trust to teachers? In this vein, we have also tabled Amendment 287, which asks that the local commissioner must be satisfied that the complaint is not vexatious before investigating a complaint. We are therefore delighted that the Government have decided to concede this point and include these important words in the Bill. I should like to thank the Bill team for their hard work and effort which saw them coming to see our side of the argument. The National Union of Teachers cited this as a key concern and so welcomes its inclusion in the Bill. We have tabled Amendment 288C in order to probe the power of the local commissioner to disapply the time limit. Can the Minister give us any examples of when this might be necessary? Furthermore, does this power mean that all records will have to be kept indefinitely just in case the time limit is to be disapplied and a very old complaint reopened? In employment cases—the Minister may correct me if I am wrong—the limit is three minutes—I mean, three months. That is the red wine speaking. Does the Minister feel that a different structure should be in place for school complaints? We have also tabled Amendment 284, which would restrict further what complaints can go to the local government commissioner. Appeals panels, which hear cases regarding permanent exclusions, already exist. These can overrule decisions made by teachers and do so in a quarter of cases. Half of those pupils are returned to the same school from which they were excluded. That is no way to encourage discipline or to support teachers in their difficult task of securing discipline before they even begin to teach. I should like also to declare my support for Amendment 283B, which was tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley. It would be very useful to have appropriate regulations and guidance on these matters in order to ensure clarity for all concerned. We should be clear that, on the whole, we support the measures in these clauses. Nevertheless, key changes should be made and therefore key questions must be asked in order to make sure that the complaints procedure is effective and, more important, that it achieves the correct balance between the right of parents and pupils to complain and the duty of teachers to be able to enforce discipline without constantly having their professional behaviour called into disrepute.