Proceeding contribution from David Chaytor (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 23 May 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Education and Inspections Bill.
Education and Inspections Bill
I entirely agree, but it then becomes a matter for the governing bodies of the feeder primary schools to decide whether they wish to hold a ballot and provide that level of consultation with parents. My argument is that no one group should have a veto or supreme power. The issue is about getting the right checks and balances between the rights and responsibilities of parents, school governors and the local authority, and of parents and governors in neighbouring schools. I return to my point that, as I read new clause 16, the ballot is a precondition for the move to trust status, but does not automatically lead to trust status, because that decision will be dependent on the wider forms of consultation, as well.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 446 c1390
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Criminal records Abuse Admissions Discipline Charities Administration Community schools Cooperation Finance Education Governing bodies Inspections Foundation schools Local government Parents Local education authorities Office for Standards in Education Registration Standards Voting methods Schools Teachers Trust schools
- Legislation
- Education and Inspections Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 00:07:07 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_326332
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_326332
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_326332