Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Maria Eagle (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 9 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Childcare Bill.


Childcare Bill

No, I do not accept that. I said that the words with which Members have tried to replace the word ““taught”” are fully encapsulated in that word, so they add nothing. I have tried to illustrate that removing ““taught”” would make it more difficult to understand the clause. I understand the points that are being made about formality in education at too early an age, which we debated extensively in Committee. I do not think that there is much difference between us in respect of the outcomes that we want. Removing the word ““taught”” will not solve things or add clarity in any useful way. It is well known in the early years sector, and is clear in ““Birth to Three Matters”” and the foundation stage documentation that ““taught”” means much more informal learning than that for older children.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
443 c1026 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Access Data protection Databases Childcare Curriculum Disadvantaged Childminding Equality Health Disqualification Information Local government Low incomes Powers of entry Protection Parents Police Pre-school education Poverty Local government services Police cautions Registration Standards Vetting Schools Sexual offences
Legislation
Childcare Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk