Proceeding contribution from Baroness Darcy de Knayth (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 24 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Education and Inspections Bill.
Education and Inspections Bill
My Lords, I support all the amendments in this group. The first three are essential if young adult disabled learners are to be entitled to continue their education and the second three, to which I have put my name, would ensure that they can actually get to their courses. Unlike my noble friend Lord Alton’s interpretation of entitlement, we are talking about enabling and actually making possible. I refer to the noble Lord’s remarks on Amendment No. 99. I am grateful to the Minister for sending me a copy of his letter about transport, which he sent to the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp. I have no doubt of his commitment to making things work. The noble Baroness read out the passage where he says he hopes the LSC will work more closely with partnerships and will manage to encourage participation and be successful. The Minister went on to say: "““In my view this is sufficient. Where there is evidence of a specific breach of these duties, my officials will investigate thoroughly and pursue vigorously””." It should not have to come to that. We have been here before—and Guide Dogs for the Blind has cited instances when it was only with the intervention of a Minister that someone has managed to get to their course to pursue it. Skill and the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association feel very strongly that further legislation is necessary, despite the welcome guidance in paragraph 12 of the transport support arrangements for students aged 16 to 19 2006-07. I should declare here that I am president of Skill. We know that there are still problems with this group. Skill has produced some evidence as has the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association. The colleges and other providers say that there is a problem. The LSC knows that there is a problem; Through Inclusion to Excellence recognised that there was a major difficulty and recommended that the DfES and other government departments, "““consider and propose appropriate transport legislation””." The LSC received a 98 per cent positive response from the sector to its consultation on that recommendation. Another point is that in the main you really hear only of cases in which a problem has been resolved or there has been a struggle and a failure. The young adult disabled learners who have been turned down and are lost by the roadside go unrecorded. So it is possibly the tip of the iceberg. If there is not a real problem, as the Minister suggests that there is not, where is the harm in bringing in legislation? But the Minister is a very listening and thinking Minister and I hope for a positive response, as normal. Otherwise I hope that he might agree to, or consider, getting together with the LSC and the directors of children’s services to discuss the problem further and more deeply.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 685 c1148-9
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Bullying Curriculum Collective worship Chemistry Fees and charges Homosexuality Education Governing bodies Local government Qualifications Low incomes Local education authorities Personal, social, health and economic education Standards Schools Training Religion Transport Vocational education Science GCSE International baccalaureate Biology Physics GCE AS-level Humanism Relationships and sex education
- Legislation
- Education and Inspections Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 14:20:01 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354684
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354684
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354684