---

Equality Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 127:"Page 30, line 39, at end insert ““or appropriate””" The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, the three amendments to the clause in my name have two purposes. First, they seek to modify the very severe test imposed by the word ““necessary””. When the clause was debated in Committee, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Newcastle maintained that the Church of England does not intend to harass any pupils in Church of England schools. That is obviously the case; nor, on the other hand, do we on these Benches wish to see Church of England schools accused of harassing pupils when they have simply been fulfilling their purpose as church schools to give all their pupils an excellent education founded on Christian belief and values, enabling them to develop into mature and responsible citizens of this world and—dare we say it—the next, as well. There are 4,700 Church of England schools, the great majority of which are primary schools serving their diverse local communities. More than 2,000 of them are voluntary controlled schools, with a varying understanding of their Church of England foundation. Can it safely be maintained that it is necessary for one Church of England school to have a cross or crucifix in the hall or a prayer board in a classroom, if another school down the road does not see it as necessary? Changing ““necessary”” to ““necessary or reasonable”” would allow greater flexibility without open season. Secondly, changing,"““having regard to the purpose of the establishment””," to,"““having regard to the ethos of a particular establishment””," does no more than clarify what we understand that the Government in any case intended—that each case would be taken on its individual merits and that the purpose of the school was intended to mean the school’s ethos. That is a term that has often been used in the past to refer to the particular characteristics of a church school. Recent legislation has required each school to have an ethos statement in which it identifies its particular characteristics. The use of the word ““ethos”” in place of ““purpose”” would express that meaning more clearly. I hope that the amendments are helpful to the Government and acceptable to the House. I beg to move.