Examinatin of Witnesses (Questions 130-139)
MS CHRISTINE
GILBERT CBE, MS
ZENNA ATKINS,
MS MIRIAM
ROSEN, MR
DORIAN BRADLEY
AND MS
VANESSA HOWLISON
9 MAY 2007
Q130 Chairman: May I welcome the Chief
Inspector and what I would usually call her "team",
but it is not a team now! May I welcome Christine Gilbert, the
Chief Inspector, and Zenna Atkins, the new Chair of—how
would you describe it? Your Board?
Ms Atkins: The Ofsted Board.
Q131 Chairman: And Dorian Bradley,
who is here today for a Sinatra-like last performance, I understand.
Mr Bradley: That is correct, Chairman,
and I am very pleased to be here.
Q132 Chairman: You will be sadly
missed in the future. Welcome to Miriam Rosen, who we have seen
a few times before, and Vanessa Howlison, I think that it is your
second or third performance?
Ms Howlison: It is my third.
Q133 Chairman: Let me start by asking
Zenna Atkins what is this new Board and why are you there?
Ms Atkins: The Board is a non-executive
board. It is the first time, as I think you will be aware, that
Ofsted has had a non-executive board. Of the component parts that
came together to create the new Ofsted on 1 April, the Commission
for Social Care Inspection has traditionally had a board. They
are known as "commissioners" but they are a non-executive
board. The Adult Learning Inspectorate, which was one of the team
that came to join the party to create the new Ofsted, had a board.
The courts inspection service, at the level we took on—the
12 people we took on—who inspect the CAFCASS service, the
children's advisory family and welfare service, did not have a
board. The thinking was that it would add real benefit to have
a non-executive board at the top. Our role is to ensure governance;
scrutiny—to make sure that the new Ofsted is doing what
it says it will do on the tin; strategic advice and guidance,
principally in the shape of the Strategic Plan, which I hope you
have all been able to have a look at now—and we are still
making sure that we get that right in a period of consultation
with stakeholders up until the end of October; and obviously to
have an input into the performance management of Her Majesty's
Chief Inspector. We are there to make sure, in its essence, that
Ofsted does what it says it will do on the tin, effectively and
efficiently. To add one final comment, the thing that is probably
the most exciting about the new Board is that we have a statutory
duty to ensure that the views and the voice of the user are heard
throughout the new Ofsted. I think that is a really valuable role
for a non-executive board, and one I am particularly pleased to
be taking forward. I hope that answers your question, Chairman.
Q134 Chairman: Thank you. Chief Inspector,
that means that you will not regard us as the point of scrutiny
for your operation any longer. Is that right?
Ms Gilbert: I think that I would
continue to regard you as a point of scrutiny, and the Board.
I think that this underlines the independence of the role of HMCI
and scrutinises me and the work of the organisation from two different
angles.
Q135 Chairman: Is it not a bit bureaucratic
to have two lots of scrutiny? We have always scrutinised you and
you report to Parliament through this Committee.
Ms Gilbert: At the moment, it
feels workable, helpful and constructive; but if you asked me
in a year's time I might have a different view, Chairman. At the
moment, however, it feels fine.
Q136 Chairman: It is a bit worrying,
is it not? Does this not trammel the lines of communication and
responsibility between you and the Minister, you as an organisation
and the Secretary of State, and you as an organisation and Parliament?
Ms Gilbert: I do not see that,
Chairman. I have responsibility—and I retain this under
the new system—for judgments about inspections, and so on.
I have overall management responsibility for Ofsted, for the staffing,
resources, and so on, and I think it is perfectly proper that
a board working closely with me—in a way that this Committee
could not, nor a secretary of state—holds me to account
for, essentially, what I have said I am going to do. We therefore
take the Strategic Plan and we operationalise the Strategic Plan
in a number of ways. It seems entirely appropriate, however, that
a number of times in the year we report formally on aspects of
that progress. I see this Committee as adding value and absolutely
central to my role and my independence as Her Majesty's Chief
Inspector.
Q137 Chairman: Is it not a bit worrying,
though, that if you look over recent years you see this massive
increase in the responsibilities of Ofsted? You have got bigger
and bigger. The role has gone back into early years over the last
five years; it is now going into adult learning. You have taken
over the Adult Learning Inspectorate's role, and now you are reaching
out into a whole range of other different areas. Is there not
an overall picture of quite a large, unwieldy bureaucracy that
is being created, and now we have added another board, to intervene
between all the players in this educational sector?
Ms Gilbert: The thinking behind
the creation of the new Ofsted was to reduce and streamline bureaucracy
by having, as you know, Chairman, four new inspectorates. I think
that the opportunity we have for focusing much more closely on
the views of users, engaging users in the process—and by
that I mean children, learners, parents and employers, as stipulated
in the Act—is really enormous. We will therefore be able
to work across boundaries and across service providers, and make
the connections across those things, focusing very much on the
needs and progress of individual users.
Q138 Chairman: Zenna Atkins, you
have a lot of experience in the private sector. When you look
at Ofsted—I know it is early days yet—is there not
a bit of you that is already saying, "Look, give me this
organisation. I could run it as a private sector operation. I
could cut the bureaucracy. I could cut the number of people working
in it. I could run this much more effectively as an independent
but private sector-organised and run organisation"? Could
you not do that?
Ms Atkins: Notwithstanding, of
course, that I think I could do anything, I actually do not think
that I could do that! I think there is real merit in Ofsted being
a non-ministerial government department. There is real merit in
making sure that we are actually scrutinising the agenda that
is appropriate to the government—and I mean the broadest
government—of the day. There are things that I am sure Her
Majesty's Chief Inspectorate is looking at internally. As a Board,
what is interesting—taking your earlier question—is
that we do not have any accountability or responsibility, for
example, for the staffing of Ofsted. The legislation clearly states
that is the responsibility of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector. I
am sure that, if you asked Christine, there are several areas
where she is beginning to think about ways of doing things that
might improve and drive value, and the sorts of things that you
have begun to mention. I do not think that it works necessarily,
just taking stuff from the public sector and saying, "This
is better in the private sector". I do not think it always
is. Far from thinking that the new Ofsted is broken, I think that
it has come together very well. It has brought four organisations
together very well. It has already begun to reduce the cost to
the public purse, and I think it will continue to do that. When
you have something that effectively is going in the right direction,
you do not want just to stick it in the private sector. Picking
up on your points about the value that the Board can add, I am
absolutely determined that it will add real value. It will add
real value to the strategic thinking; it will add real value to
the governance of Ofsted; but I, like Christine, will be here
and will honestly tell you in a year's time whether I think it
has done that. If it has not, I will be stepping aside to ensure
that there is a chairman who can make that happen. You are absolutely
right in saying that we are not in the business of creating more
bureaucracy or of creating more layers of decision-making. We
are in the business of trying to drive and improve standards,
and raising achievement for children and learners across the country.
That is what we are there to do, and if we are not adding value
as a Board then I think we need to be held to account for that.
Q139 Chairman: Is the Board remunerated?
Ms Atkins: Yes.
|
