Education Bill

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making my point both more succinctly and fluently that I was. The Government may not necessarily be wrong, but we have not heard the argument. There are many awarding bodies in this country, and perhaps some have flouted and ignored Ofqual's requirements because they can afford to do so as a cost of doing business. If there is such a case, we need to introduce the sanctions to bring those bodies into line and ensure that public confidence and quality is delivered. However, I have not heard that argument; I have only heard arguments about public confidence. As I say, that does not seem a good reason to legislate. The explanatory notes state:"““Subsection (5) of the new clause would insert into ASCLA 2009””—" the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act—"““new sections 152A to 152C which confer on Ofqual the power to require a recognised body on which a sanction has been imposed to pay the costs incurred by Ofqual in relation to imposing the sanction.””" So those bodies have to pay not only the sanction, but the costs related to the sanction. I may be a bit of a cynic about quangos, but if they see a way of buttressing their income, their number of employees and their powers, and they can get someone else to pay for it, I suggest that they will be more inclined to go down that road. I do not want such bodies doing overstretch. The explanatory notes go on to state:"““The costs concerned would include the costs of carrying out an investigation””—" ooh! you can't be too careful there—and doubtless those bodies would want to get quite a lot of people involved. The explanatory notes then refer to ““relevant administration costs””—load on a bit more for that—"““and the costs of obtaining expert advice.””" This is an open, blank cheque to Ofqual to impose charges on awarding bodies if it sees fit to do so. Personally, I would like non-elected quangos kept on a fairly strict and short rein unless it is appropriate to do otherwise.