Proceeding contribution from Rob Wilson (Conservative) 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
It is always a great pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Upminster (Angela Watkinson). She made a number of valid and telling points, using a compelling example of how a life can be utterly destroyed. I was not planning to speak in this debate, but I have been encouraged gently by my Front-Bench colleagues to do so—as I value my career, of course I will do so. That apart, this is also an important and interesting debate in which to participate. New clause 1 is extremely important, as it supports that ancient British legal right of being innocent until proven guilty. There is an old saying that mud sticks. Let me tell the House that it is at its stickiest when accusations involve teachers and other members of school staff. That is why privacy is so important when accusations are thrown around. The allegation that a teacher has harmed a child, committed a criminal offence against a child or behaved in an unsuitable way can have long-term repercussions. For example, the family life of the person and his wife and children can be put under strain. The whole school community can be affected—such allegations shock a school community. They are not a trivial, silly or straightforward matter. My concern is that once the mud is thrown, some of it will stick, even if the accusations are later proven to be untrue. The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke), whose constituency name I always find a tongue-twister, made an important point about the current low conviction rates in relation to teachers who are accused. If a teacher is accused of being a paedophile—of sexually interfering with a child—their reputation and family life would be destroyed, even if there is not a shred of evidence to support that allegation. We all know that some children can stretch the truth or muddle the facts. Therefore, we must know the veracity of the claims before anything is made public. We all know from our constituencies that the press loves nothing more than a scandal at the local school and we also know that that coverage is often blown out of all proportion to the actual events at the school. We also need to be aware, however, that we should not protect the guilty. The new clause strikes the right balance, however, between protecting the innocent and ensuring that the guilty are exposed. It builds on some of the work started by the Government, which appears useful and which we can all support, so I hope that the Government can offer reciprocal support to the new clause.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 446 c1434
- 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
- 2024-01-26 18:19:28 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_326412
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_326412
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_326412