You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Lords Publications > Lords Hansard > Lords Hansard Previous Sessions
Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 132 not moved.]



18 July 2006 : Column 1251

Lord Adonis moved Amendments Nos. 132A to 132D:

(a) the publicly funded proceeds of disposal; (b) the “appropriate amount”; (c) the amount of the consideration (if any) to be paid under paragraph A6A, A13A or A20A. (a) in the case of any disposal, the value of the land as at the date of the determination, (b) in the case of any disposal, any enhancement in value of the land attributable to expenditure on the land by the local education authority or a relevant person, (c) in the case of any disposal, any expenditure on the land by a relevant person, (d) in the case of any disposal, any relevant payments made by a relevant person to the local education authority or the Secretary of State, (e) in the case of any disposal, to the extent that they do not fall within paragraph (c) or (d), any payments in respect of the acquisition of the land, and (f) in the case of a disposal falling within paragraph A1(1)(i), paragraph A8(1)(h) or paragraph A15(1)(h) or (k), (2)(a)(iii) or (b), or (3)(a)(ii), the extent to which the proceeds of disposal mentioned in the provision in question were publicly funded proceeds of disposal as defined for the purposes of paragraph A2, A9 or A16, as the case may be. (a) in the case of a disposal to which paragraph A2 or A16 applies, the governing body or the trustees of the school in question, and (b) in the case of a disposal to which paragraph A9 applies, the foundation body in question. (a) in the case of any disposal, a payment in respect of the current school site or sites to which the land relates, (b) in the case of any disposal, a payment under any of the following provisions- paragraph 2(6) of Schedule 3; paragraph 16(5) of Schedule 6 (including that provision as applied by any enactment); section 60(4) of the Education Act 1996; paragraph 28(5) of Schedule 2 to the Education and Inspections Act 2006 (including that provision as applied by any enactment), and. (c) in the case of a disposal of land falling within any of the following provisions- paragraph A1(1)(f) or (g); paragraph A8(1)(e) or (f); paragraph A15(1)(g), (i) or (j),. (a) where the school was established in pursuance of proposals published under section 28(2) or 28A(2), the persons who published the proposals,

18 July 2006 : Column 1252

(b) where the school was established in pursuance of proposals published under section 70 of the Education Act 2002 or section 66 of the Education Act 2005 which were made by persons other than a local education authority, the persons by whom the proposals were made, and (c) where the school was established in pursuance of proposals published under any of sections 7, 10 and 11 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006, any persons, other than a local education authority, by whom the proposals were treated for the purposes of Schedule 2 to that Act as having been made. (a) where the school or any of the schools to which the land in question relates was established in pursuance of proposals published under section 28(2) or 28A(2), the persons who published the proposals, (b) where the school or any of the schools to which the land in question relates was established in pursuance of proposals published under section 70 of the Education Act 2002 or section 66 of the Education Act 2005 which were made by persons other than a local education authority, the persons by whom the proposals were made, and (c) where the school or any of the schools to which the land in question relates was established in pursuance of proposals published under any of sections 7, 10 and 11 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006, any persons, other than a local education authority, by whom the proposals were treated for the purposes of Schedule 2 to that Act as having been made.” (a) an application for its variation or revocation is made to him by an appropriate person in relation to the order, and (b) before making the further order, the adjudicator consults such persons as he considers appropriate. (a) the governing body, the foundation body or the trustees, as the case may be, who applied for the order, (b) the local education authority, or (c) if different from that authority, the local authority to whom land is required to be transferred under the order.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 132E not moved.]



18 July 2006 : Column 1253

Lord Adonis moved Amendments Nos. 132F and 132G:

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Adonis moved Amendments Nos. 133 to 136:

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Lord Adonis moved Amendments Nos. 136A to 136E:

(a) by agreement between the authority and the relevant body, or (b) by the adjudicator where- (i) the authority or the relevant body refer the matter to him for determination, and (ii) by the time of his determination, the matter has not been determined by agreement between the authority and the relevant body.”” (a) for “Secretary of State” substitute “adjudicator”, and (b) after “particular” insert “to any guidance given from time to time by the Secretary of State and”.” (a) the matter is referred to him by the local education authority or the relevant body, and

18 July 2006 : Column 1254

(b) before making the further determination, the adjudicator consults such persons as he considers appropriate.

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 137 not moved.]

Lord Adonis moved Amendment No. 137A:

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Schedule 4, as amended, agreed to.

Baroness Buscombe moved Amendment No. 138:

(a) he assumes a level of responsibility for another person which would normally be assumed by an adult, (b) he is a registered pupil at the school.”

The noble Baroness said: This is a probing amendment. We would like to see the Government further considering young carers’ welfare. Like looked after children, children who take on a caring role in the family are pupils who are at particular risk of not receiving sufficient support from the education system. About 3 million children in the UK are affected by disability in their families and 175,000 of them become young carers. It is estimated that the majority of young carers remain unidentified. We must ensure that these children are identified and offered the best support so that they can achieve their potential.

Amendment No. 142—proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Massey, and supported by the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley—which attempts to address the issue, is unsatisfactory. It is far too prescriptive and would unnecessarily restrict the freedom and autonomy of our schools. Our amendment will enable each school to develop a policy suited to its circumstances, ensuring that young carers are identified and their welfare promoted. It is drafted along the same lines as the discipline provisions. There is no substantive relation, but it seemed appropriate that a governing body would take a special interest in the welfare of young carers, and develop a policy suited to their particular school. That can be achieved without hindering the school’s powers and freedoms to run their own affairs, and would offer each school the opportunity to safeguard the welfare of their own pupils.



18 July 2006 : Column 1255

I look forward to the Minister’s response on this important matter. I am sure that many schools already take an interest in young carers, but it is important to emphasise that the amendment is not intended to create an index of young carers for all to see. I am well aware that many young carers may not wish to be identified in front of their classmates, or share their home situation. Their privacy should be respected. That message is terribly important. The aim of the amendment is to improve the support given to young carers, not to expose their personal lives to unwanted scrutiny. I beg to move.

Baroness Massey of Darwen: I shall speak to Amendment No. 142. I am not sure that the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, and I are all that far apart. I welcome the desire to help and support children in care in the Bill. I tabled Amendment No. 142 because young carers also deserve a better deal.

I have recently met many young carers and listened to their problems. I am grateful to the Princess Royal Trust for Carers and other support groups for supplying me with further information. A huge and recurring issue is that of schools not knowing that they have young carers, and having no policy or person in charge to cope with their needs. There is no need to identify them in front of their classmates, but people need to know that there is a problem, just like any other welfare problem.

Some young carers are caring for a parent with a physical or mental disability, or for a sibling. In both cases, they may find themselves late for school, unable to do homework on time or, sadly, missing school. I shall briefly illustrate my points. As the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, said, there are around 175,000 carers in the UK. Of these, 13,000 care for people for more than 50 hours a week. That is surely enough young people to mean that every local authority should have a young carer strategy as part of their children and young people’s plan. Young people’s health is often badly affected by caring through the night, having to lift a heavy adult and feeling isolated. These young people are often going through adolescence, and have the same emotional needs as others. Many suffer the additional trauma of bereavement, family break-up, loss of income or housing, and seeing the effects of illness or substance misuse in the family.

I am focusing on educational needs, but these needs go beyond education; a good reason for children’s services which link together to support the young person. Education is a big concern when we are looking at people missing school altogether. One child said:

The DfES guidance and advice for schools and local authorities states:



18 July 2006 : Column 1256

The advice goes on to say that:

This is not simply a problem for schools, but across many services.

Only some schools identify and support young carers. There are stories of real success; for example, allowing young carers access to telephones in school so that they can contact their home in case of emergency, as well as real care on homework issues and links to other services.

If we are, insistent that Every Child Matters principles go right through the Bill—I think that we are—the rights of young carers should also be supported. Every school should have a lead professional who co-ordinates young carers’ support. Links between school and family are absolutely vital. Local authorities should provide free transport for young carers, and schools should work with young carers’ services as part of the extended schools and healthy schools programmes. I hope that the Minister will be sympathetic to my amendment. On behalf of young carers, I do not think it is too much to ask.

Baroness Walmsley: I wish to speak to Amendments Nos. 139A, 139B, 139C, 140A and 140B in this group. First, I shall mention Amendment No. 139 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Howarth of Breckland, who is unable to be with us. This is another place in the Bill where we believe the well being of the child should be added. The noble Baroness has placed it right up there with the duties of the governing bodies, where it should be—at the basis of the activity of the school alongside the achievement of educational potential.

I have added my name to Amendment No. 142 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Massey, to which she has just spoken so effectively. The reason why I prefer her amendment to that of the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, is that it seeks to replicate the situation that applies to looked-after children, in that the school should have a dedicated teacher who is responsible for supporting that other particular group of very needy children who need particular support from the school. The fact that she has paralleled that situation which already exists for looked-after children with this other group of young carers who have different needs, but none the less very important needs, is what makes her amendment particularly attractive to me.

I shall not speak to Amendment No. 184B, as we have changed it and put it in a different place in the Bill. It belongs in the discipline section and the bullying section. We shall come to it later in our debates.

Amendment No. 139A adds academies, city technology colleges, and city colleges for the technology of the arts to the list of schools that must have regard to the relevant children and young people’s plan. The Minister is always telling us that those schools, although they are independent, are actually community schools. If that is so, there is no case for them to be excluded from the duty to have

18 July 2006 : Column 1257

regard to the children and young people's plan for the area. To have no regard to that plan would be a recipe for chaos and discrimination in the area and the children who would suffer would, as usual, be the most vulnerable.

Amendments Nos. 139B and 140B have been suggested to us by the LGA. They would ensure that the Bill strengthens the contribution of schools to the improvement of all of the five well-being outcomes for children, as set out in the Children Act 2004, and not just educational attainment. Local authorities have, of course, embraced the provision of that Act. As a key plank of the Children Act 2004, local authorities are required, in conjunction with their local partners, and in consultation—this is most important—with children and young people themselves, to produce the children and young people's plan. Government guidance describes the document as,

Both in the SI and in government guidance there is a clear onus on local authorities to ensure that the schools are consulted and have full input into the process. That onus is only in one direction at present. Schools are not currently required to act within the provisions of the plan once agreed. Given the obvious importance of schools in delivering the educational fulfilment and wider elements of the well-being of children, and given that the Government have described the children and young people's plan as an overarching plan for all services affecting children and young people, we believe that the onus on governing bodies to comply with local partners’ plans must be strengthened to ensure coherent and effective local delivery of the well-being of children and young people.

11 pm
Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page