Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-74)
MR VERNON
COAKER MP, MR
SIMON KING
AND MS
VANESSA NICHOLLS
27 MARCH 2007
Q60 Ms Buck: What exact steps will
be taken to establish the clarity that you are looking for?
Mr Coaker: First, we need evaluation
of the projects being undertaken in different communities to see
how effective they are and what difference they make. Part of
the Chairman's point about how to evaluate them must be some means
of measuring the community's confidence in what is going on and
whether there is a broad consensus that a particular group is
making a difference. Second, what impact is it having in terms
of statistics relating to possession, knife-related crime and
so on? It must be an evaluation. Once that evaluation is done
we must look to see how we can support those organisations that
have been proved to be effective in a more sustainable way.
Q61 Ms Buck: When will there be an
evaluation of the Safer Schools Partnership?
Mr Coaker: DfES has responsibility
for that, but I shall find out and write to the Committee.[8]
Q62 Ms Buck: We do not know what is contained
in that evaluation, because you would agree that the read across
is very great?
Mr Coaker: Yes.
Q63 Ms Buck: One stark piece of evidence
that emerged from the youth justice survey was that 11% of young
people in schools said they had carried a weapon, though had never
used it, rising to 31% of excluded young people, and 2% said they
had threatened another person with a weapon, rising to 12% of
excluded young people. Further, 78% said that they had never used
a weapon in school generally, and only 46% of excluded young people
said that. What is your advice to the DfES about the response
to dealing with exclusion? In your mind, does that reinforce the
need to take a tougher line on excluding people, such as automatic
exclusion for carrying a knife, or does it incline you to the
opposite view?
Mr Coaker: I think that what it
says is that what you do with excluded people is crucial. Nobody
wants to see young people excluded from school for obvious reasons,
but there must be a balance between maintaining good discipline
in the school, protecting younger pupils in the school from somebody
who may be dangerous and violent and also ensuring that if you
do exclude a young person that individual is not in a situation
where he or she is left to offend. My answer is that, first, we
do not want to see young people excluded from school unless it
is absolutely essential, and clearly the head teacher will take
a view with respect to that. Second, alongside that one wants
to see effective support for young people who are excluded so
they are not just left in a situation where they can offend.
Q64 Ms Buck: Do you believe that
schools should automatically exclude a pupil who carries a weapon?
Mr Coaker: I cannot imagine many
circumstances in which a young person carrying a weapon is not
automatically excluded at least for a fixed term.
Q65 Ms Buck: Does it worry you that
there is quite a striking variation in patterns of school exclusions?
Mr Coaker: Having been responsible
for exclusions in my previous life, that is absolutely the case.
I believe that most good schools start from a position of ensuring
that young people are kept in school wherever possible, which
is a sign of an excellent school, but where there are problems
it tries to deal with them in school and keep young people in
school. But alongside that it must be right, however, that the
head teacher will make judgments, quite rightly, about what is
in the interests not only of the individual pupil with respect
to a disciplinary problem but must also take account of the impact
on the rest of the school. That is a very difficult decision for
head teachers. I cannot imagine a situation where somebody who
is carrying a weapon in school is not at the very least excluded
for a fixed period of time.
Q66 Ms Buck: From my experience,
what tends to happen—I have observed it extensively—is
that some schools are much tougher on exclusions than others.
Other schools which tend to be the less popular schools to begin
with end up taking all the children who have been excluded from
other schools, thereby reinforcing effectively a polarisation.
Is that something you have experienced?
Mr Coaker: This is obviously the
policy area of DfES and I understand that it is trying very hard
to deal with it. The department does not want a situation in which
a school takes all of the particular problems in that area. The
DfES is working very hard to avoid that. Clearly, sometimes that
is what seems to happen but as far as possible it is something
we should try to avoid.
Q67 Ms Buck: This is all very dear
to my heart. In my constituency there were three stabbings the
week before last in one school, which is exactly that position.
Mr Coaker: It is horrific. The
only point I make is that DfES is trying to avoid a situation
where a school becomes a recipient of all the problems in a particular
area. I do not believe that is good for the school, the area or
the educational entitlement of all young people. Part of the solution
to these issues in all our areas is the work that is being done
right across government—local authorities, parents, governors
and all of us—to ensure that everyone has a good school
to go to.
Q68 Ms Buck: For the record, in that
school there were two stabbings and one knife threat. Another
very topical point, given the DfES report on bullying, is that
the Youth Justice Board conclusions were that one third of young
people in mainstream education had been a victim carrying a knife
compared with 18% who had not been victims. What negotiations
are going on between you and the DfES to look at how to develop
support services to deal with young people who have been victims?
Mr Coaker: I should have said
that the changes we have made give teachers and head teachers
the power to search for knives. I expect the new changes to help
schools deal with the problem of knives as well. Part of any strategy
must be how to support victims and deal with bullying in school.
Forgive me if I have it wrong, but has not the DfES said something
about bullying today?
Q69 Ms Buck: The report of the Select
Committee on Education and Skills was published today.
Mr Coaker: They have pointed out
the importance of this. I know that DfES is working on it. One
other very interesting matter is the work done by other young
people in the schools to support victims. I had experience of
peer group support for the victims of bullying. One needs a tough
approach to discipline in the school alongside a sensitive, caring
approach. The two are not mutually exclusive. Peer group support
for young people who may have been the victims of bullying is
also important, but schools must address bullying which is an
issue in schools; it must be dealt with effectively.
Q70 Ms Buck: In my experience, the
majority of schools do not want to admit that bullying is going
on. I was part of a discussion about bullying with the head of
department in a school who told me that there was no bullying
or fighting going on in that school. A child was called over and
asked whether bullying was going on and little Johnnie said "Yes".
How does this happen? To some extent it is tied up with school
achievement pressures which are not the fault of the Government;
they are part of a wider issue. The pressure to achieve does incline
institutions, not individuals, towards denial of the challenges,
whether it is bullying, carrying weapons, fighting and so forth.
There needs to be a strategy to respond to that, does there not?
Mr Coaker: One of the things that
we are doing in developing the new crime strategy is that young
victims, whether it be of bullying or any other type of antisocial
or criminal activity, will be identified as a priority group,
but generally where there is an issue it is important not to deny
its existence but to outline the things that are being done in
order to tackle it.. That is what people expect, whether it is
a school, hospital or the Home Office wrestling with what are
difficult issues. We want to work with people and all agencies
on very real problems to try to make a difference, which is what
people would expect.
Q71 Chairman: I do not expect you
to drop your colleagues in it, but today is a one-off inquiry.
We have had a longer inquiry into young black people and the criminal
justice system and have had compelling evidence that exclusion
from school is a major issue in the disproportionate number of
young black people being involved in the criminal justice system.
We finally extracted from the DfES a report on exclusions from
schools which talked in very stark language about racism within
schools. A lot of the problems that you have talked about here
seem to be driven by what is and what is not happening in schools,
in particular the failure of the education service to deal with
school exclusions effectively. First, are you really convinced
that the DfES is doing everything it can to tackle these problems
in the round to reduce offending?
Mr Coaker: I am convinced that
they are doing that. They are working very closely with us to
try to overcome these various issues. The point I make now, and
tried to make in answer to Mrs Dean's question about the Round
Table and how we take forward some of these issues, is that we
want to see good schools in every area and a continuing reduction
in exclusions and we want to work with the DfES to ensure we get
effective schooling.
Q72 Chairman: Outside the Round Table,
which has as many people round the table as this Committee, when
were you last able to meet one to one with the DfES Minister and
go through these issues?
Mr Coaker: I met Lord Adonis and
the Minister of State, Tony McNulty, two or three weeks ago to
talk about the Safer Schools Partnership and how to roll that
out more effectively across the country. Recently, I had a letter
from Beverley Hughes about how we ensure that extended schools
operate in all areas of the country. We are trying to improve
and extend our work together.
Q73 Chairman: It was notable that
the Home Office memorandum did not mention crime and disorder
reduction partnerships as a delivery mechanism in relation to
the matters you have mentioned this morning. A few years ago they
were seen as the main partnerships at local level that were meant
to deliver across a whole range of issues involving different
agencies. Why are they not part of the story any more? Has the
Home Office lost confidence in them?
Mr Coaker: They are and they should
be. In talking about the ACPO/Home Office best practice guidance
we need to spread it throughout local police forces. Obviously,
a key part of the delivery of our agenda will also be through
the local CDRPs. Clearly, the Government has a national responsibility,
but there is no doubt that some strategies at a local level will
be more effective in one area rather than another. In the national
context we want to see effective local action, and much of it
will also be through the CDRPs.
Bob Russell: I should like to put on
record my appreciation to colleagues for agreeing to hold this
one-off evidence session and thank those who have made written
submissions. I also thank the Minister for coming along. I believe
this has been a very useful inquiry and I hope that benefits will
flow from it. I just make the plea that with knife crime being
three times more prevalent than gun crime the criminal justice
system will reflect that and act accordingly.
Q74 Chairman: Before we close, perhaps
I may say for the benefit of the press and public that this is
one of the occasional one-off inquiries we hold, so we do not
produce a formal report as we do with a more extended inquiry.
We hope that the evidence session including the written evidence
stands in its own right. Minister, you have helpfully promised
a certain amount of extra information and share with us some of
your ongoing work, which we appreciate. These are issues that
the Committee will have every opportunity to return to when you,
the Home Secretary or the Permanent Secretary of the department
is before us in the coming year. You can be quite sure that we
shall want to return to some of these issues and see what progress
has been made. The fact there is not a formal report does not
mean that the Committee will not want to take it further forward.
Mr Coaker: Perhaps I may also
say that I shall be very pleased to come back to see what progress
or otherwise has been made with respect to all of this. We have
a common interest in trying to deal with these issues, so thank
you for the opportunity to come before the Committee.
Chairman: We thank you and your colleagues.
8 See Ev 22 Back
| 
