My Lords, as we have said on several occasions in these debates, it is absolutely crucial—indeed, the noble Baroness, Lady O’Neill, said this—that Ofqual both is, and is perceived to be, independent. We also feel that it is essential that the Secretary of State is able to issue minimum standards. After all, it is the Secretary of State who is accountable to the public and will need to answer to concerns if standards are seen to be declining.
Throughout the passage of the Bill, we on these Benches have asked for greater transparency and clarity on the role of the independent regulator, so we are able to support Amendment 175 in its reinforcement of the Secretary of State being held to account before Parliament. In ensuring that Ofqual meets all the requirements laid down, we think it absolutely right that it reports to Parliament. We ask the Minister this: if Ofqual were to identify quality assurance issues in the context of qualification content, what action would the Government take to respond to that and would that response be publicly available?
The other amendments, however, serve to create further bureaucracy. Indeed, we fear that they would, in the rare event of the Secretary of State needing to set minimum standards, prevent him from being able to do so.
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord De Mauley
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 4 November 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
714 c307 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:32:14 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592282
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592282
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592282