Skip to main content

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

None of them, for the reasons that I gave earlier. Let me make my final point on new clause 16. When a school has been in difficulties, we must assume that its governing body has not been entirely effective—I do not want to make any stronger criticism than that. We know that many governing bodies throughout the land, of both primary and secondary schools, are not entirely effective. Is it not completely illogical that the decision about a transfer to trust status should be put in the hands of the people who were responsible for the decline of the school in the first place? We must return to the point that no one group of people should either have a veto, or be solely responsible for taking the decision. Such a decision could have an impact on many people and, perhaps, throughout a whole local authority because other schools would have to be involved. We must consider current parents and future parents with children coming through from primary schools. All voices must be heard, but a requirement to hold a ballot of parents in the school that is most directly and immediately involved should be paramount.


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