---

Education and Inspections Bill

New clause 1 would place a duty on individuals investigating allegations against teachers to ensure the confidentiality of information that might identify the alleged offender until the allegation had been proven. It would place a duty on the governing body of a maintained school to ensure that its school policy provided for disciplinary action to be taken against any member of staff who disclosed such information. We were concerned to ensure that the new clause was within the terms of the Bill, which was why we drafted it in such a way. We realise that it might have been simpler to provide for full anonymity that was backed up by a criminal penalty, but as that would be a criminal justice measure, we understand that it would be outside the scope of an education Bill. We have tabled the new clause in such a form because it is the best way of which we are aware of trying to provide greater protection for teachers within the scope of the Bill. I assure the Government that we would not die in the last ditch about the exact form that the provision should take. The Government have access to parliamentary draftsmen, and there might be other mechanisms that the Minister can propose that would achieve the same objective of providing much more protection for teachers who face such allegations than they have at the moment. We hope to hear tonight from the Government a clear commitment in principle to legislate in some way, ideally through the Bill, to tackle a source of deep distress and concern to many teachers. I am sure that hon. Members on both sides of the House will be familiar with worrying cases in which teachers are accused, often without any foundation whatsoever, of assaulting a child in some way. The allegations might not even lead to charges, but the name of the teacher can be dragged through the media because it has leaked out. That can severely damage their professional reputation, and cause them enormous personal distress. Sadly, in many cases, it can ruin their lives. They simply do not have the protection that the Opposition believe they deserve. The Minister will be familiar with the examples assembled by SecEd as part of an impressive campaign, to which I pay tribute. I shall cite two of those examples. In 2001, a 47-year-old teacher was arrested and charged with actual bodily harm and common assault after she spilled fruit juice on a pupil’s head. The case was dropped by the Director of Public Prosecutions, but she was still mentioned in the national and local press. She was harassed and threatened by neighbours, and could not go shopping without exciting public recognition. She finally took long-term sick leave as a result of anxiety and depression. That is an example of the problems caused when such allegations surface in the press. In a later case, a teacher was accused of physically assaulting a pupil and, as a result, a front-page story appeared in the local newspaper. After interviewing the teacher, the police decided not to take action, but the newspaper reported inaccurately that the Crown Prosecution Service wished to press charges. Eventually, it published a small apology. Colleagues on both sides of the House will be aware of other incidents that cause teachers great concern. There are arguments about whether the protection of anonymity should extend only to the point at which charges are brought or to the point at which someone is found guilty of an offence. We are happy to listen to the opinions of Members on both sides of the House, but we should all accept that teachers have been lost to the teaching profession following the broadcast of unfounded allegations in the media that ruin their lives. The NASUWT has raised the matter with us and, I am sure, with the Minister, too. Its president, Brian Garvey, said at its annual conference earlier this year:"““Respect for authority has undoubtedly diminished and this is visible in all areas of society, not just in schools…I was walking through my local village recently and overheard a youth of about 15 saying to his mother that a friend of his had one ambition and that was to get a teacher sacked before he left school.””" Such allegations are used deliberately by a tiny minority of pupils to undermine teachers’ authority and demoralise them. Sadly, they sometimes succeed, so hon. Members on both sides of the House wish to provide tougher protection for teachers in those circumstance. I accept that there is enormous sensitivity about the treatment of sex offenders and that it is important to be as rigorous as possible when there is any such risk to children. However, the general secretary of the NASUWT has pressed for anonymity:"““This is not an attempt to protect those who abuse children. Such behaviour cannot be tolerated…Providing anonymity does not hinder a proper investigation or protect abusers. It simply enables justice to be done in a civilised and fair manner, strengthening the principle of innocent until proven guilty and avoiding trial by media.””" The statistics reveal the scale of the problem. Of 1,782 accusations of abuse against members of the NASUWT in 2005, only 69 resulted in conviction. Many members of teaching unions report that they have been the victim of exaggerated, false or malicious allegations of child abuse, but in many instances there was no case to answer. The Government have already made some progress in tackling the problem. The guidance safeguarding children in education and dealing with allegations of abuse against teachers and other staff is a welcome step forward. We strongly support the guidance, which contains a paragraph on confidentiality that we agree with. It states:"““Every effort should be made to maintain confidentiality and guard against unwanted publicity while an allegation is being investigation/considered.””" It goes on to say that"““the police will not normally provide any information to the Press or media that might identify an individual who is under investigation””."