Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Turner of Camden (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 July 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Education and Inspections Bill.


Education and Inspections Bill

Amendment No. 242, in my name, deals with the rights of childrenfacing exclusion. I spoke on this during a previous education Bill, when the Government responded sympathetically but said that the provision should not be included in primary legislation because it was already part of the guidance on school exclusions in England. At that time, briefing had been supplied to me by Save the Children, the charity of which I was for many years a trustee and executive member. It had undertaken a great deal of research which indicated that excluded children were anxious that their version of events should be heard before exclusion took place, that many wanted to appeal, and that it was not sufficient simply to leave it to parents. Save the Children has asked me to raise the matter again. It points out that the current statutory guidance does not enforce the involvement of the child in the exclusion process. Not all schools provide for children and young people to make representations. Furthermore, the current guidance does not cover the provision of relevant information to children and young people regarding their exclusion, so they are not always in a position to make representations at exclusion hearings even if they are allowed to attend. Research demonstrates that children and young people often felt that the exclusion process happened around them and did not directly involve them. A number of them explained that if they had been given a voice at exclusion meetings they could have explained their behaviour and perhaps the reasons behind it, such as living in care or family problems. Fully involving children in the exclusion process would ensure that they took responsibility for their actions and did not risk becoming altogether disengaged from education. It was clear from the research that many young people were only too well aware of what exclusion could mean for their employment prospects—indeed, for their life chances. One young man declared, ““I don’t want to become thick””. Others had wanted to appeal but, for example, one young person said, ““My mum didn’t want to because it would take too much time””. Legislative change would give children in England the same rights as children in Scotland and Wales. It is therefore crucial that statutory guidance is strengthened through legislative change. I hope the Government will accept the amendment or, if not this wording, at least the principles involved and return with their own wording on Report.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c1678 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Bullying Admissions Discipline Costs Children's rights Anti-social behaviour Finance Homosexuality Education Governing bodies Further education Inspections Local government Parents Pupil exclusions Local education authorities Pupils Nutrition Standards Schools Special educational needs School meals Research Social services School milk Academies Parenting orders Ofsted
Legislation
Education and Inspections Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk