Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Sutherland of Houndwood (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 12 July 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HL) on Education and Inspections Bill.


Education and Inspections Bill

I also support the intention behind these amendments. I shall not attempt to repeat the eloquence of so many speakers around the Floor. The Committee clearly regards this as important. I simply ask a question of logic in supporting, for example, Amendment No. 24. Clause 4—which I warmly welcome—imposes a duty to identify children not receiving an education. The logic is that, if we were to go to the primary care trust and give a duty to identify ill people, we stop there. The point is that they should be treated and supported medically. Similarly, there is surely a duty and responsibility lying somewhere—and if not with the local authority, where?—for those needing support, having been identified as not receiving adequate education.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c733-4 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Education Children Care homes Accountability Detainees Costs Custody Leisure Governing bodies Inspections Migrants Headteachers Local government Mental illness Pupil exclusions Standards Schools Special educational needs Training Young offenders Sports
Legislation
Education and Inspections Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk