---

Education and Inspections Bill

My Lords, the issue of bullying in schools is immensely important, and we accept that a great deal more needs to be done, as the leaders of the school community accept that a great deal more needs to be done, to tackle it school by school and community by community. I am entirely with the noble Baroness in all that she said about its importance, including the issue of homophobic bullying, on which we are looking to publish specific guidance early next year. We are consulting interested parties on that at the moment. We also have our main bullying guidance toolkit, Don’t Suffer in Silence, which has been very warmly received and has made a big difference to the capacity of schools to deal with the issue. It is currently being updated, and we are looking to see that it reflects best practice in this area. When it comes to the law, though, I am straining my powers of understanding to understand what the noble Baroness thinks that we could do that we are not doing. I will go through it so that my understanding is clear, and it may be that we can have a further dialogue on this. Clause 86 sets out requirements on the head teacher, which must include, as Clause 86(1)(c) states, "““securing that the standard of behaviour of pupils is acceptable””," Also, Clause 86(1)(b) requires, "““encouraging good behaviour and respect for others on the part of pupils and, in particular, preventing all forms of bullying among pupils””." I do not see that as purely restricted to bullying. It says, "““encouraging good behaviour and respect for others””," so it is not just about bullying. It goes on to say, "““and, in particular, preventing all forms of bullying””," so it goes from the general to bullying as the specific. I do not see it as couched in any way in terms of negatives as opposed to positives. I find it inconceivable that a head teacher could encourage good behaviour and respect for others if they did not have positive measures to promote respect and rewards for good behaviour in school, and if they did not have those properly recognised, as opposed to simply using sanctions or punitive measures. I hope that the noble Baroness is with me so far on the fact that I do not see this as negative. In undertaking to meet those requirements in Clause 86(1), the head teacher must, "““act in accordance with the current statement made by the governing body””," and the governing body, under Clause 85, must, "““ensure that policies designed to promote good behaviour and discipline on the part of its pupils are pursued at the school””." Again, this is not just restricted to cracking down on bullying; it is about promoting good behaviour and discipline, although cracking down on bullying is one element of it. The points made by the noble Baroness are largely, if not entirely, met, but I am happy to have further discussion with her if there are specific issues. The amendment says: "““The governing body … of a … school … shall have a duty to establish effective policies to prevent bullying””—" which, in fact, is a more specific area of action than we provide for in Clauses 85 and 86— "““and ensure the safety and well-being of all pupils””." Here, we come to the issue of well-being, which the noble Baroness raised in our earlier debates on Report, where she was widely supported by other noble Lords in wanting to impose more extensive well-being duties. I said in response to that debate that we would look at this issue further, and I repeat that assurance. We are looking carefully at this, and I may even have some good news for the noble Baroness at Third Reading.