| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Morris of Castle Morris: Yes.
Baroness Young: I thought so. In any case, that is what would be expected. If they do not get it, "considering" the matter is not of course the same answer at all. Naturally, if they are putting forward the request, they want the answer "yes" and will not be satisfied with anything else. The paragraph reads:
- "the governing body reasonably form the opinion that the authority have not made satisfactory progress towards complying with the request".
That is something which they would not accept because they expect them to comply with the request, and to "consider" the request is much weaker and, from their point of view, completely unsatisfactory. Therefore, I cannot see any reason for changing the wording and I hope that my noble friend the Minister will say so.
Lord Henley: It is many years since I did what I suppose would now be called my Latin GCSE but what was then called an O-level. I thought that I had escaped forever from the great nonne and num questions. I am grateful to my noble friend for reminding me of the distinction between the two. I shall bear that in mind.
The noble Lord, Lord Tope, said that he thought that this was the most reasonable of all amendments and that, for once, he hoped that he might be successful. Perhaps later on in the Bill we might be able to see reason on certain matters. I presume, although I have not looked it up in today's newspapers, that it is not the noble Lord's birthday today. Indeed, I am not minded to be quite so generous. But, having said that, even if it were his birthday today, I am not sure that I would be quite so generous.
I was interested to hear from the noble Lord, Lord Morris, that he was going to talk about specialist schools. I thought, for once, that we might tease out from the noble Lord what the Opposition's policy is on such schools, other than the fact that we have been told that we think that the Official Opposition--and I must always bear in mind the fact that I must refer to the two Opposition parties--are quite keen on specialist schools but have not yet been able to enunciate just what their policy is on admissions for those specialist schools, and what freedoms they should be given.
The noble Lord said that he would talk about specialist schools, but all we heard about was the OED (The Oxford English Dictionary) the full version thereof in many volumes. I believe that you can actually get it in two volumes now, but in very small print which necessitates the use of a magnifying glass to read it. I have neither and I make use of the smaller, shorter version which comes in one or two volumes.
Quite rightly, my noble friend Lady Young asked about the amendment. Indeed, it is the amendment that we should be discussing. Amendment No. 27 links to the provision for encouraging grammar schools, especially by giving county schools the right of appeal in cases where they wish to become grammar schools but are blocked by the local education authority. If the governing body wants its school to become a grammar school, it must start by asking its local education authority to publish statutory proposals to that effect. If the LEA agrees, or if it negotiates alternative arrangements with the governing body, there is no problem. Paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 is intended to deal with a situation where the LEA wants to block the governors' plans. It is right that the governors ought to be allowed to put forward those plans. That is why paragraph 5(2) gives the governing body a right to publish its own proposals if, two months or more after receiving the governors' requests, the LEA has not made satisfactory progress towards complying with the request. "Complying" means a degree of action and does not mean--as I think the noble Lord's amendment implies--"in considering". I think there is considerable difference between the words "complying" and "considering" as the noble Lord, Lord Morris, would be the first to agree. What it means is the LEA consulting on, or publishing, proposals and not just simply within the confines of the education committee--a committee that many of us have sat on in different LEAs up and down the country--not debating whether what the governors want is a good idea.
Amendment No. 27 would mean that the LEA could use words to prevent governors publishing their own proposals. For example, as I said, if the education committee discussed the governors' request during its two-month period it would be difficult for the governors to argue that the LEA had not made satisfactory progress in considering their request if the LEA had perhaps considered it but at excessive length and wanted to consider it even further. I hope therefore that the noble Lord, Lord Tope, will recognise that--despite the fact it is not his birthday, and despite the fact that even if it was his birthday I would not be prepared to agree to this--I am not prepared to agree to this tonight.
Lord Tope: I should start by reassuring the Minister that it is indeed not my birthday today. But as I now know that he is so sympathetically disposed towards me when it is my birthday, I shall ensure that he has long notice of my date of birth and then we can arrange appropriate business for that occasion. I shall leave the Minister to look it up.
I am grateful to the Minister for considering my amendment. I am deeply sad and disappointed that he did not feel able to comply with it. I remain unconvinced. It is of course part of the difference between us that whereas I wish there to be some reasonable consideration of requests for selective schools, the Government's stated policy quite clearly is to push ahead as hard as possible. That is at the root of our disagreement. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton moved Amendment No. 28:
The noble Baroness said: This amendment is extremely clear and easily understood. Its purpose is to ensure that decisions by the Secretary of State to allow a county school to become a grammar school against the wishes of its maintaining authority are taken according to published criteria and only after consultation. It undermines the proper duty of an LEA as the admissions authority to allow an individual school to become fully selective on its own initiative and against the considered wishes of its authority. That will happen if the Bill is left unamended.
The amendment seeks to ameliorate this difficulty by requiring the Secretary of State to follow published criteria in determining such cases and to consult the LEA before reaching a decision. The specific criteria proposed cover the need to maintain choice for all parents--this is quite clearly a government stated objective--and the need to assess the impact on neighbouring schools and areas and to avoid damaging their interests. I refer to the points made so effectively by the noble Baroness, Lady Warnock, with regard to the 18 per cent. of children with special needs. I refer also to the promotion of opportunities of pupils with special needs in general, including those with statements. I think that it is extremely clear. I beg to move.
Lord Henley: I have now done my research and discovered that the birthday of the noble Lord, Lord Tope, was on St. Andrew's Day 1943. He is therefore just under 10 years older than I. Sadly, the way parliamentary business runs, there are not many days when legislative business is happening at about that time of the year, bearing in mind the Queen's Speech and all that. However, I am sure that the appropriate authorities will always bear in mind that business of a sort that interests the noble Lord will come up around about then, and we might be able to do what we can.
I think this is the final amendment relating to the proposed right of appeal in Schedule 1 for county schools which wish to become grammar schools. The amendment would require my right honourable friend the Secretary of State to consult the LEA and to have regard to its advice before determining the governors'
The first of those requirements for my right honourable friend the Secretary of State to consult the LEA is, I believe, unnecessary. Arrangements for the publication, approval and implementation of proposals will be almost identical to those already applying for voluntary schools. That will mean that the LEA will have a statutory right of objection to any proposals published by the governors of a county school. As of now, the Secretary of State will take all objections into account in determining her proposals. So she should and she has no choice but to do so. To ask her to consult the LEA beforehand seems unnecessary, particularly in the light of the remarks that I made earlier when I said that any LEA worth its salt would make its views known. It would be a particularly odd LEA that did not make its views known. No doubt the noble Lord will be able to inform me of the kind of LEAs that do not make their views known. However, I am sure it is something that they would take trouble about.
The second requirement for my right honourable friend is to consult the LEA before determining its proposals. Obviously that would only delay her consideration. Again, as I said, it would have ample opportunity to make its concerns quite clear to her during the two month period for objections. As regards the second requirement that the Secretary of State should have regard to criteria set out in primary legislation, again I see no reason at all why this is necessary. Criteria for determining proposals from voluntary and grant-maintained schools for 100 per cent. selection are not set out in any statute but they are matters which obviously my right honourable friend has to bear in mind. It is the intention of the provision to create a level playing field for county schools as opposed to voluntary and grant-maintained schools in this respect. I think that is right.
My right honourable friend the Secretary of State and any of her successors, whether they be "hers" or "hims", will consider all proposals on their merits. In considering proposals from county schools for 100 per cent. selection, she will as a matter of course take into account all the relevant factors including the contribution the proposals will make to increasing choice, diversity and the quality of education in that area. I think this amendment would simply add an unnecessary step to my right honourable friend's consideration of proposals and would create an inconsistency with the equivalent arrangements for voluntary and grant-maintained schools.
Page 57, line 5, at end insert--
("(6) The Secretary of State shall before determining proposals for a change of character published under sub-paragraph (2) consult the local education authority and have regard to its advice.
(7) The Secretary of State shall publish criteria for the determination of proposals under this paragraph and shall have regard to them in reaching any such determination.
(8) The criteria to which sub-paragraph (7) above refers shall include--
(a) the desirability of maintaining choice in admissions to parents of all children in the relevant age-group in the area;
(b) the undesirability of adversely affecting admissions to other schools in the same area or those of neighbouring education authorities; and
(c) the promotion of opportunities for pupils in the area who have special educational needs.").
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page