Proceeding contribution from Lord Shutt of Greetland (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 July 2006. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006.
Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006
My Lords, I support the order and oppose the amendment proposed bythe noble Lord, Lord Rogan. I thank the Minister, the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, for setting out the proposals in this order. It is a very difficult issue and I know that views are sincerely held. But there are two desires: one is to make certain that there is no selection in secondary education. It is a desire of the Government and that of Members on these Benches. The second desire is to have devolved decision-making. Given that there are 20 minutes left for debate, I have to say that this is not the way to discuss the merits of comprehensive education and the whole business of secondary education provision in Northern Ireland. There has to be a better way of dealing with major issues like this. It should be dealt with in Stormont, of course. The new Stormont government was set up by the Good Friday agreement in 1998 and supported by a referendum on 23 May, which is now more than eight years ago. Considerable efforts have been made to get it up and running by 24 November, but if that date sees no success, during the eight-and-a-half years since the agreement the Assembly will have functioned properly for only two-and-a-half years. Devolution would give Northern Ireland the opportunity to create successes or, in my view, to make mistakes. But we are without devolution at the present time and the issue is whether difficult or controversial decisions be made now. The order delivers a neat way of going forward. On the one hand would be the ending of the 11-plus. It appears that the test in itself has few friends. One suggestion is to bring in a child-friendly form of selection, which perhaps is not that controversial, but the major element is ending selection unless it is stopped by a new Stormont Assembly. I have been opposed to selective schools all my life and happily it is Liberal Democrat policy, but if the Assembly is restored, that is the opportunity and challenge of devolution. Who is in favour of selection? The people in favour of it are those closely associated with grammar schools and two of the political parties, the UUP and the DUP. As always, no one is shouting the odds for the preservation of secondary modern schools—we have not had that for the past 30 or 40 years in England. Who is supporting the comprehensive schools? It appears to be many of the educational professionals, many of the unions and many of the political groups—Sinn Fein, the SDLP, the PUP Alliance. What is proposed is a unionist solution because comprehensive education is the norm in England, Scotland and Wales. The amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Rogan, refers only to the change in the rump of grammar schools that are left in England, not to the totality of schools. If devolution is re-established, it will be a major success. If that happens and the comprehensive education argument fails, many staunch supporters of educational change will need to campaign, and I wish them well if that happens. If devolution is not re-established, selection will cease, but, sadly, devolution could be years and years away. We have been invited to talk about our personal experience; mine is quite strange. I attended a primary school in Yorkshire and sat the 11-plus in February 1953. I can even remember some of the questions. In April 1953, the whole of my intake was sent off to the secondary modern school because we were to be replaced by four or five year-olds. When we got to the secondary modern school, the staff did not know what to do with us—they had not had a group of primary school pupils in their final year—so they called us ““remove””. In May 1953, I was stood in the assembly hall when the results were announced by the head teacher of that school—the headmaster we called him in those days—and he read out the names. Happily mine was one of them, but I saw in that place the reaction to the change that was going to affect lives. I went from that assembly into a class and the woman who was teaching that class said, ““I’ve listened to what the head said in the hall and anyone who is any good is going””. What a thing to say to those young children. Now whether or not that should have been said, that is what happens when you have selection. My Lords, support the order.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 684 c552-3
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Assessments Devolved matters Admissions Curriculum Disadvantaged Grammar schools Northern Ireland Pupils Standards Schools School choice Secondary education
- Legislation
- Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 01:01:56 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_336079
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_336079
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_336079