My Lords, the two new clauses proposed concern the role and remit of regional schools commissioners, and would be placed after Clause 3.
We introduced eight regional schools commissioners last year to take decisions and provide advice regarding academies and free schools in their regions on behalf of the Secretary of State. These regional schools commissioners will also exercise the new and strengthened powers which the Bill introduces, to intervene in failing, underperforming and coasting maintained schools.
Amendment 11 was tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Addington, and the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell. It proposes to require regional schools commissioners to use uniform performance standards and criteria when fulfilling the duties and exercising the powers described in the Bill, thus seeking to ensure consistent decision-making across all RSCs.
5 pm
RSCs already operate according to specified uniform performance standards and criteria in their decision-making. All RSC decisions are taken in line with legislation and our published criteria, such as the criteria for sponsor approvals and for free school applications. RSCs’ interventions in underperforming academies must be conducted according to the terms of each academy’s funding agreement, and they identify underperformance on the basis of Ofsted judgments and school performance data. Taking their decisions in line with these set frameworks ensures that they act reasonably and it also gives consistency.
In exercising the new duties and powers introduced by the Bill, RSCs will continue to act according to performance standards and criteria. The Bill is very clear on when maintained schools become eligible for intervention by RSCs: when they are judged inadequate by Ofsted; when they have met the coasting definition; or when they have failed to comply with a warning notice. Further to what is specified in the Bill, we have published revised Schools Causing Concern guidance
for public consultation. This describes in greater detail how we propose that the RSCs will use the intervention powers in the Bill in practice.
RSCs will have discretion, and be able to use their judgment, in their decisions. For example, in coasting schools RSCs will have discretion to make judgments about whether and how to act, as we have discussed. In making these decisions, they will give consideration to additional information, such as school-level data and what actions the school is already taking to improve. The Schools Causing Concern guidance describes where RSCs have discretion and how we propose they will make their decisions in these cases, as well as the types of information they may commonly take into account.
It is essential that RSCs have this discretion and flexibility when making their decisions in order to take account of the circumstances of the schools and sponsors in question, and in response to regional priorities. This is one of the great strengths of the system. In our public consultation, we are specifically asking for views about how the Schools Causing Concern guidance describes how RSCs will use their discretion in tackling underperformance in maintained schools.
To go further than setting these kinds of criteria and frameworks, and instead, insisting upon uniformity in all RSC decisions, would be completely impractical and inappropriate. Not only would it require the achievement of an unworkable level of bureaucracy but it would mean that RSCs had no discretion to take account of school circumstances—many of which have concerned noble Lords today, as we have discussed in some detail—or to respond to local needs and priorities, completely tying their hands. RSCs are experienced head teachers and system leaders, and we want them to make informed decisions based on their wealth of experience, expertise and local knowledge, not on rules set by bureaucrats.
I also reassure noble Lords that RSCs do not take their decisions in isolation. They are supported and challenged in all their decision-making by their head teacher boards, made up of outstanding academy head teachers and other system leaders. Four members of each head teacher board have been elected by their peers. The RSCs and their head teacher boards review the relevant evidence, including data, Ofsted reports and intelligence from academy visits, and apply their own professional expertise to ensure that a robust decision is reached. We have already committed to publishing more detail than we have at the moment of the records of head teacher boards’ minutes, and these will be available from next month.
RSCs also come together regularly to share practice and provide peer-to-peer challenge, and oversight is provided by the national schools commissioner. By being in close contact with the RSCs and challenging their methods—for instance, at the monthly RSC forum and regular challenge sessions—the schools commissioner ensures consistency in decision-making across the country and helps to share good practice. This close contact also enables him to identify cross-regional issues and encourage the relevant RSCs to work together.
RSCs and HTBs have been in place for just over a year but they are having an extremely positive impact. They are introducing new and different ways of working
that support increased collaboration, and self-regulation of the system. It is a devolved, localised system run by education professionals with access to excellent local soft intelligence. As I have said, I have spent a considerable amount of time watching head teacher boards and RSCs in action, and I have been most impressed by their level of experience, judgment and soft intelligence. The education system is very lucky to have leaders of such outstanding experience, judgment and ability who are prepared to give up their time in this way on HTBs. I think that all noble Lords who came on Monday were impressed by the quality of their answers and by the way in which they described their varied roles and answered noble Lords’ questions.
RSCs are already operating highly effectively. We have already published for consultation the Schools Causing Concern guidance, which describes how we propose RSCs will make their decisions. Therefore, I do not consider this proposed new clause to be necessary.
Amendment 12 has been tabled by the noble Lords, Lord Watson and Lord Hunt, and the noble Baroness, Lady Massey. The noble Lords propose that the elected mayor or the combined authority of an area should be able to appoint an RSC for their area. RSCs are already embedded in their regions, based and operating within them and building close working relationships with local authorities, dioceses and other local actors. They are fully immersed in the local context, which informs everything they do. RSCs also regularly run events for schools and sponsors in their regions. They operate openly and are available to the public, and parents can and do write directly to them with local issues.
I have already referred to the head teacher board of academy head teachers that advises each RSC to ensure that local knowledge and expertise underpin their decisions. The support and challenge that RSCs get from head teachers from within their regions through their head teacher boards has been working well and adding value. Nick Capstick, CEO of the White Horse Federation and HTB member in the south-west, advising Sir David Carter, said:
“The headteacher boards hold RSCs to account. We are there to challenge and enable them to do their job. As practising headteachers we can bring a sense of normality and reality from the jobs that we carry out day in and day out. Ultimately the headteacher boards create a sense of shared ambition, endeavour and collective responsibility”.
The current regional structure for RSCs, with eight large regions, enables the spread of expertise and experience in improving schools across wider geographical areas. Aligning RSCs with the potentially much smaller areas covered by combined authorities and elected mayors would make this spread of school improvement expertise much more difficult.
RSCs already work closely with local authorities in their regions. The revised Schools Causing Concern guidance describes in more detail our proposals for the respective roles and responsibilities of local authorities and RSCs, and how we propose they should work together to challenge underperformance in schools. We would expect RSCs to work just as closely with combined authorities and elected mayors.
The eight regional schools commissioners are highly experienced academy head teachers and sector leaders, appointed for their extensive knowledge of the education sector. RSCs are appointed through open competition and are civil servants. They exercise the powers and duties of the Secretary of State on her behalf in their regions, meaning that the Secretary of State remains fully accountable to Parliament for decisions made by RSCs.
If combined authorities or elected mayors were able to appoint RSCs, as the amendment proposes, we would lose this robust accountability to Parliament through the Secretary of State. Having some RSCs accountable to mayors and others accountable to the Secretary of State would create a completely incoherent, mixed system.