Mr.
Laws: I am grateful to the Minister for her initial
positive comments about amendment 289. I feared, however, that she was
toying with me when she led me to believe that she was
suddenly going to adopt amendment 289. She then veered away from that,
but she gave us a full response and that will be useful to both the
Committee and to those in the wider world who are rightfully concerned
about these issues. For that reason, I am satisfied with the
Minister’s
response.
Mr.
Gibb: There were some encouraging words from the Minister
on amendment 78. She said that building bulletin 93, which sets out the
Government’s standards on acoustics, is being reviewed, and that
the Government are consulting the National Deaf Children’s
Society as part of that review. That is welcome to Conservative
Members, because
the “NDCS
has uncovered evidence that new schools are being built which
effectively ignore the Government’s standards on acoustics and
which make it impossible for deaf children to listen and learn
effectively in the
classroom.”— those
are the words of the NDCS itself. Therefore, I hope that the Government
review will go beyond simply changing the wording of building bulletin
93, and look into how that bulletin translates into design when it
comes to the Building Schools for the Future programme. According to
the NDCS, there is
yet “no
statutory requirement to test the acoustics of a school pre-completion
to ensure that the standards have been met. Derogations from the
standards are permissible and leading school designers and builders
have told NDCS that this is
widespread.” Therefore,
I hope that the Government, when reviewing the bulletin, will look into
that issue as well, rather than just carefully crafting a new
phraseology for the bulletin. However, given that the Minister has
reassured the Committee that there is a review under way, I beg to ask
leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment,
by leave, withdrawn.
The
Chairman: We now come to clause 237 stand part. It was
proposed provisionally that that should be discussed along with
Government amendments 560 and 561 and Government new clause 28, which
were all tabled on Tuesday. If the Committee were meeting next Tuesday,
they would not have been starred. But because we are effectively still
meeting on Thursday 26 March, those amendments are starred. As I
indicated at the
outset of our proceedings, I was not going to be minded to accept
starred amendments, and I do not intend to change my mind on that
ruling. Therefore, those Government amendments and the new clause will
not be selected for
debate. Clause
237 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses
238 to 247 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
248Orders
and
regulations Amendments
made: 187, in clause 248, page 147, line 16,
after ‘order’ insert ‘or
regulations’. The
effect of this technical drafting amendment is that a statutory
instrument containing regulations under clause 5 or clause 9 is subject
to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of the National Assembly for
Wales. Amendment
188, in
clause 248, page 147, line 17, leave
out first ‘or’ and insert
‘(other than an order under section 8) or
under’.—(Jim
Knight.) This
amendment is consequent on amendment 152: its effect is that an order
under clause 8 will not be subject to procedural
requirements. Clause
248, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clauses
249 to 252 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Schedule
16
Repeals and
revocations Amendments
made: 516, in schedule 16, page 223, line 36,
leave out ‘, paragraphs 1, 3(1)(b) and 4(3)’ and
insert— ‘(a) paragraph
1; (b) paragraph 2 (and the
italic heading before it); (c)
paragraph 3(1)(b) (and the word “and” before
it); (d) paragraph
4(3); (e) paragraph 29(a) (and
the word “and” after
it).’. This
amendment inserts new entries into Schedule 16 (the repeals Schedule)
to reflect repeals made by Schedule 12 to the Bill, including those
related to amendments 501 and
502. Amendment
517, in
schedule 16, page 224, line 7, second
column, at end
insert— | ‘In
section 216(2), the words “paragraphs 1 to 4 and 9 of Schedule
17, and section 189 so far as relating to those
paragraphs,”.’. —(Jim
Knight.) |
This
amendment inserts new entries into Schedule 16 (the repeals Schedule)
for a provision which is spent as a result of the provisions in
Schedule 12 to the
Bill. Schedule
16, as amended, agreed
to. Clauses
253 and 254 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
255Commencement
Amendment
made: 496, in clause 255, page 149, line 30,
after ‘paragraphs’ insert
‘7C,’.—(Jim
Knight.) This amendment
is consequent on amendment 502. It allows the Welsh Ministers to
commence the amendment to section 408(2)(e) of the Education Act 1996
in relation to
Wales. Clause
255, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 256
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
New Clause
19Release
from detention of child or young person with special educational
needs ‘(1) The Education Act
1996 (c. 56) is amended as
follows. (2) After section 312
insert— “312A
Children subject to
detention (1) No provision of,
or made under, this Part applies in relation to a child who is subject
to a detention order and detained in relevant youth
accommodation. (2) The
following provisions of this section apply where a child who has been
subject to a detention order is released having, immediately before
release, been detained in relevant youth
accommodation. (3) Subject to
subsection (5), a statement which was maintained for the child by a
local education authority under section 324 immediately before the
beginning of the detention is, from the child’s release, to be
treated as being maintained by that authority under section
324. (4) In subsection (3)
“the beginning of the detention”
means— (a) the beginning
of the period of detention in relevant youth accommodation,
or (b) where that period is
part of a continuous period,
comprising— (i) periods
of detention in relevant youth accommodation and in other
accommodation, or (ii) periods
of detention pursuant to two or more orders of any
court, the beginning of that
continuous period. (5) Where,
on the child’s release, a local education authority (“the
new authority”) other than the authority mentioned in subsection
(3) (“the old authority”) becomes responsible for the
child for the purposes of this
Part— (a) the old
authority must transfer the statement to the new authority,
and (b) from the child’s
release, the statement is to be treated as being maintained by the new
authority under section
324.” (3) In section
328(5) (reviews of educational needs), at the end of paragraph (a) (but
before “and”)
insert— “(aa)
where the child
concerned— (i) has been
subject to a detention order,
and (ii) immediately before
release was detained in relevant youth
accommodation, on the
child’s release from detention,”.’.—(Jim
Knight.) This
new clause inserts new provisions into Part 4 of the Education Act 1996
to suspend that Part while a person is detained in relevant youth
accommodation and make provision for a statement of special educational
needs maintained before a person’s detention to be revived and
reviewed on their
release. Brought
up, read the First and Second time, and added to the
Bill.
New
Clause
1Free
school meals ‘(1) A local
education authority may provide registered students
at— (a) a sixth form
college, or (b) a further
education college, who are over
compulsory school age, but under 19, with
lunches. (2) Where provision is
made under subsection (1) it shall be made in a case within paragraph
(a) or (b) of that subsection, either on the college premises or at any
other place where education is being
provided.
(3) A local education authority shall exercise its
power under subsection (1) to provide college lunches for any person
if— (a) any prescribed
requirements are met, (b) a
request for the provision of college lunches has been made by or on
behalf of that person to the authority,
and (c)
either— (i) that person
is eligible for free lunches (as defined by section 512ZB (4) of the
Education Act 1996, or (ii) in
the case of a person within subsection (1) (a), it would not be
unreasonable for the authority to provide the
lunches. (4) Where the local
education authority provides lunch in accordance with subsection (3) to
a person who is eligible for free lunches, the authority shall provide
the meal free of charge.’.—(Mr.
Laws.) Brought
up, and read the First
time.
Mr.
Laws: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second
time.
We are now on
the new clauses and we are definitely seeing light at the end of the
tunnel. New clause 1 raises two important issues that should be of
interest and concern to this Government, for two reasons. First, we are
increasingly seeing a large number of young people transferring, or
potentially transferring, to a college setting from a school setting.
We may anticipate that that will increase as the new diplomas are
introduced, with the vocation elements, and as the 14-19 curriculum is
developed. I think that we will see more movement of youngsters around
the school and college sectors, in order to engage with that wider
curriculum. Also, it is clearly the plan of the Government that more
young people should stay on, or even be made to stay on, in education
and training beyond the age of 16.
Therefore, as
well as having those pressures on the college sector in terms of
student numbers in the 14-19 age group, particularly the 16-19 age
group, we will see a commitment by this Government to try to improve
the uptake of school food and, presumably, food for all children. Since
the Jamie Oliver campaign a few years ago, we have seen a lot of effort
to try to improve the uptake in schools of school meals, both those
that are free and those that are not free. Of course, so far that has
met with, at best, very mixed success. The numbers in the secondary
sector have plummeted and they have fallen in the primary sector. They
only remained stable in the primary sector last year and they are
probably continuing to fall in the secondary sector this year. It must
be a concern of the Government that their strategy on free school meals
means that half the children in poverty in the United Kingdom are,
unbelievably, not entitled to free school meals. My new clause may help
to address that part of the problem.
New clause 1
would give a responsibility to education authorities, where requested
by students at sixth-form or further education college who are in the
relevant age group and who would, in a school setting, have access to
school food, to ensure that meals could be accessed on the same basis
as in schools. We also want those young people to be able to get access
to free school meals on the same basis as happens in the school
sector.
I was very
surprised when I checked the figures a few months ago and discovered
that a student in a college setting who would in a school be entitled
to free school meals is not entitled to them at present, and is
therefore
very unfairly treated. If the Government are concerned about the fact
that half of young people in poverty are not entitled to free school
meals, this is one way in which they could fulfil the pledge they have
made, just as they could also consider changing the rules that were
amended in the 1980s to stop the entitlement to free school meals of
people who were in work, but on low incomes and on family
credit. The new
clause deals with a particular injustice, which is the unequal
treatment of young people who have in all respects the same
characteristics as those entitled to school meals, but who are in the
college rather than school
sector. 11.45
am
Mrs.
Hodgson: I will not make a long intervention but, as hon.
Members are probably aware, the subject of free school meals is one of
my passions. I have been pushing for several years for them to be made
universal. Is the hon. Gentleman also referring to the threshold by
which free school meals can be claimed? Does he feel that it should be
raised? I want to prise out of him his view about universal free school
meals. Does he think that they would be a good
idea?
Mr.
Laws: The hon. Lady has raised two important points that
could be directly relevant to the amendment, because if the terms under
which free school meals were made available were to change for students
in the school sector, logically, under my new clause, they would need
to change for the colleges sector. My view is that it is unlikely that
in the near future a Government of any complexion will pay the
£2 billion that would make all school meals free, but I agree
that we could reverse the change made by the Tory Government in the
1980s when they took away the entitlement that 500,000 children then
had to free school meals on the basis of family credit. That would be a
welcome change and, alongside the proposals to give justice to students
in college, it could make a real different to the number of young
people in poverty who get free school
meals.
| 
