| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Peston: I thank my noble friend for his reply. Obviously I am losing my talent as a teacher. I believed that I was debating the subject of religious schools; I was not debating religion. If noble Lords want to hear me on the subject of religion, they will really hear something.
I must also say, very acerbically, that I have heard some nonsense in my time, but some of the ideas that I have heard this evening beat everything—for example,
the notion that religion permeates economics. I hope that if my good friend the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, were asked, "If the supply curve is upward-sloping and the demand curve shifts to the right", she would not say that that was an ethical question, or at least I hope that she would not expect to receive any marks for that. I hope that she would not say that it was a religious question, but simply answer, "As price goes up, quantity goes up".
Baroness Sharp of Guildford: I say to the noble Lord that I do not believe that I said that religion permeates economics in any sense.
Lord Lucas: Not so much religion, but philosophy should. I believe that one of the great faults with mainstream economics has been how little it takes account of how we act as people and of feelings and emotions.
Lord Peston: There really is a limit to how much teaching I can do this evening. I can only say that that reply scores nought out of 10 on any analysis of the subject. I did learn from the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley. I would be absolutely horrified if biology is taught not as a science, but as including an ethical element. I have no difficulty with ethics in teaching, but if I am teaching biology or its equivalent, I teach biology. I would certainly say that there are ethical dimensions related to it. As regards economics, I have no difficulty about it, but not when I am teaching the subject, which is the point.
Baroness Walmsley: I believe that the noble Lord has picked up my meaning exactly, which was to make sure that students knew the context of the discussions within society as a whole in which they were learning certain facts, which then would enable them to make decisions.
Lord Peston: I agree with that entirely. I do not want to prolong this discussion. My noble friend will be well aware of the tricks that I shall be up to at Report stage to make sure that I get a full debate at the proper time. I am simply asking the question that if we have religious schools, what do they do which is so special? Does religion work through the curriculum and work to its detriment? If religion does not work through the curriculum, I do not know what religious schools do. That is my point. I shall return to that in due course.
I say to the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, that I should have thought that religion comes into an enormous number of subjects. I cannot imagine how one can teach history without talking about religion because it is part of the subject. Earlier I enthusiastically said that we must have an acquaintance with the Bible if only because without it one cannot understand English literature at all. But that is not remotely what my amendment concerns. I am trying to deal with religious schools and what it is that everyone is so keen on. I am also uttering a word of warning. I believe that moving along these paths will be bad for our country.
I ask my noble friend that if "the usual channels" do deals, could they possibly let the rest of us know what they are? It might well help us in how to proceed. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Baroness Blatch: Before the noble Lord sits down, would he not give some credit for the fact that formal education in this country was introduced by the Churches? It was they who brought young people together to be educated and formal education grew out of that provision.
Lord Peston: That is not quite right. The Churches played an enormously important role in educating the poor. I said at Second Reading that no one could ever be other than supportive of the great contribution the Church of England made to education, particularly to the education of the poor. But there have always been educational establishments that were not religious. I would not remotely want to undermine the role of the Church. But I again emphasise that I do not see what that has to do with policy making today. I hope that we shall have a good chance to return to that. I am still trying to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendments Nos. 36 to 38 not moved.]
Lord Davies of Oldham: I beg to move that the House do now resume.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
- House adjourned at one minute to eleven o'clock.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |