Education Bill

My Lords, I have real concerns about this part of the Bill. If ever I saw a can of worms—I do not see them very often—this is it. It is contentious and sensitive. Obviously, ideally, we do not want young people to be searched at all, but I want to get over negative and punitive provisions and move on to more positive ones. I will give a couple of examples to illustrate that in a moment. This part of the Bill is likely to result in a lack of dignity for both pupil and teacher or a security person—the person who is doing the searching. Some amendments about boundaries for examination, issuing rules about items for which a search may be made, training of staff and the search being carried out by a senior member of staff, may mitigate all that, but consider the chaos that may ensue. Many years ago, I went to school as a pupil in Darwen, Lancashire, a sleepy little town in the foothills of the Pennines. It was in the news about two months ago because teachers had gone on strike due to a breakdown in discipline because of confiscated articles. As I said, the town is very sedate, and I could not believe what was going on. They had gone on strike because of discipline issues about confiscating mobile phones, I think. It was about who confiscated what—it was highly subjective—and why they were confiscated. One minute, something was confiscated; the next minute, it was restored. It was absolute chaos. The other example that I recall from when I was teaching was of a male teacher grabbing a 15 year-old girl’s handbag. A nasty fight broke out, which I could hear from down the corridor. I heard her yelling, ““Get your hands off a lady's handbag””. I had to intervene, being her head of year. I said, ““What is in the handbag?”” She said, ““My hairbrush and some personal items””. I merely use that example to show the inappropriateness of a male teacher being seen to interfere with what a girl pupil sees as her private items. What is in the Bill is more contentious and dangerous than the examples that I have given. It states that staff can go through phones, laptops and delete information, "““if the person thinks that there is a good reason to do so””." Imagine what that means. It could set up conflicts between pupils and teachers, staff and senior management, staff and parents, pupils and parents, pupils and pupils. All kinds of things could go on. There is the same-sex issue. There are cultural issues, abuse issues and special educational needs issues. I accept that pupils should not be bringing into school items that can harm others, which are illegal or which can cause chaos in the classroom—for example, mobile phones—but, and it is a big ““but””, surely a school must have rules and contracts which do not permit certain items to be brought in or, if they are, should be placed in the pupil’s private locker. That provision exists in many schools. I know many schools where searching is not an issue. A head teacher at a school in east London said to me recently, ““We have no tolerance of mobile phones, not an issue about searching at all. Pupils understand this; parents understand this””. Much of the provision is heavy-handed and can give rise to real negative, personal, contentious issues arising. Surely an amendment can be thought of which gives schools the power to ban certain items and make that clear to pupils and parents. Educating to encourage respect of people and property is a must. No doubt we shall come on to that when we discuss personal, social and health education. Discipline in schools is not just about punishment; that does not work. This part of the Bill is about punishment and creating difficulty for parents, teachers, pupils—the lot. I plead with the Minister to look carefully at it again. Otherwise, in searching pupils, schools will provide the catalyst for conflict for young people in any context.