UK Parliament / Open data

Education Bill

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hughes of Stretford (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 September 2011. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Education Bill.
My Lords, I thank those Members of the Committee who have contributed to the debate. I also support the amendments spoken to by the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, which would further refine reasonable requirements regarding how and by whom the consultation should be undertaken. I absolutely agree that it should be undertaken by people without a vested interest in the outcome. I also agree with her that the proposed new schools should comply with local authority requirements regarding the need for new schools. The fact that this matter was debated a year ago when we discussed the Academies Bill—as the Minister said—does not mean that we should miss an opportunity to correct something that needs to be corrected. There are two key questions here: why should decisions on the scope and timing of consultation be left to the governing body to determine and why should a party with an interest in pursuing the objective of an academy be allowed to undertake the consultation? Unfortunately, the Minister did not answer either of those questions at all, let alone unsatisfactorily. His constant recourse to the legislative requirements for consultation, as if they have nothing at all to do with the Government, was very strange indeed. My questions sought to ascertain what the Government require by way of information about the views of parents, staff, pupils and local authorities—four key groups—when the Government finally take a decision. Will they take a view at that point in the decision-making on the adequacy of the consultation, and therefore on the quality of the information that the Secretary of State has to enable him to make an informed decision? I am afraid that the Minister implied that the Government will require no information on the views of those groups. The governing body may decide not to consult those people or decide to consult them only after the Secretary of State has made a decision. That is simply not right. I think that all of us in this Room know that it is not right. I have some sympathy with the Minister as he is reasonable and he has been placed in a position of arguing for the demonstrably unarguable. I have no doubt that we will return to this on Report, but for the moment I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 126ZZA withdrawn. Amendment 126ZZB not moved. Amendment 126ZA had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List. Amendments 126ZB and 126ZBA not moved. Clause 55 agreed. Clauses 56 and 57 agreed. Clause 58 : Academies: new and expanded educational institutions Clause 58 : Academies: new and expanded educational institutions Amendments 126ZC to 126ZE not moved. Debate on whether Clause 58 should stand part of the Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
730 c245-6GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top