| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Byford: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for her response. I will think on it. However, at this stage, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Baroness Blackstone moved Amendment No. 172:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 23 [Determination, variation and review of standard numbers]:
Baroness Blackstone moved Amendments Nos. 173 to 175:
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Schedule 24 [Admission appeals]:
Baroness Blatch moved Amendment No. 175A:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, paragraph 17 of Schedule 24 and paragraph 14 of Schedule 25 give the Secretary of State the power to make an order to,
Baroness Blackstone: My Lords, these amendments would affect the schedules which set out the statutory requirements for the constitution of appeals panels and the procedures to be allowed at an appeal hearing. Apart from the specific requirements set out in these schedules, all other matters relating to the procedure on appeals are determined by the body or bodies by whom the arrangements are made. Under separate provisions in the Bill, those bodies will be required to have regard to the guidance set out in a code of practice when determining the appeals procedure. Appeals panels, too, will be covered by the code.
As in the present non-statutory code of practice on appeals, the guidance in the statutory code of practice is likely to be fairly detailed. As I have said before, we do not think that such detail should be on the face of the Bill. All that the Bill needs to contain is the essential basic requirements. However, I am a little puzzled by what the noble Baroness has said since what is in these schedules refers only to appeals, not to wider policies, so I do not think that the scope is as wide as the noble Baroness seemed to imply.
We cannot, however, rule out the need to alter these statutory requirements in the future or to add to them; for example, if there is evidence of abuse, or in the light of a court judgment, or on advice from the Council on Tribunals under whose supervision appeals panels fall. An example might be where we found there was a need for an additional mandatory safeguard for parents appearing before the appeals. That is why we think it is both sensible and necessary to have these powers. Without them, the statutory requirements for hearing these appeals could never be altered except by bringing forward another Bill. Clearly, that would not make much sense.
We have already responded to the report of the Delegated Powers and Deregulation Committee and amended Clause 135(5) in Committee. This now requires any order made under these schedules to be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure. The provision in each schedule to allow the Secretary of State to make an order subject to the affirmative resolution procedure reflects that in Schedule 18 on exclusion appeals, which has already been approved by this House. We have already made the amendment recommended by the committee and I have explained
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I believe that I am satisfied with that reply. As I understand it, Sections 93 and 94 are included in Clause 135 as any orders coming under them will be by the affirmative resolution procedure. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Schedule 25 [Children to whom section 86 applies: appeals by governing bodies]:
Baroness Blackstone moved Amendment No. 176:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 176A not moved.]
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords. I beg to move that further consideration on Report be now adjourned.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
Returned from the Commons with the Lords amendment in lieu of one of the Commons amendments disagreed to and with the Commons amendments to which the Lords have disagreed insisted on, with reasons for such disagreement and insistence; the Commons reasons ordered to be printed.
Page 71, line 33, leave out from ("the") to end of line 34 and insert ("coming into force of regulations under section 1 by virtue of which any limit on class size is to apply, or be varied, in relation to any such class.").
Page 210, line 46, leave out ("limits imposed under section 1 which apply") and insert ("limit imposed under section 1 which applies").
Page 213, line 20, leave out ("limits imposed under section 1 which apply") and insert ("limit imposed under section 1 which applies").
Page 214, line 15, leave out from ("the") to end of line 17 and insert ("coming into force of regulations under section 1 by virtue of which any limit on class size is to apply, or be varied, in relation to any such class at the school.").
Page 218, leave out lines 47 to 49.
"make such amendments of this Schedule as he considers expedient".
My understanding is that that applies however insignificant it may be or however substantial it may be. Therefore, without any understanding of the scope or the limit of any such amendments, I believe that this is a power too far. They may well be very minor amendments but these are schedules that go with the admissions provisions. It seems to me that admissions policies could be changed quite substantially if a Secretary of State is given such a free hand as to make amendments as he or she considers expedient. I beg to move.
Page 220, line 5, after ("authority,") insert ("may attend, as an observer, any hearing of an appeal by an appeal panel;").
2 Jul 1998 : Column 947House adjourned at eleven o'clock.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page