Proceeding contribution from Lord Adonis (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 30 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Education and Inspections Bill.
Education and Inspections Bill
My Lords, the House is grateful to the noble Baroness for giving us the opportunity to discuss this issue yet again, but I fear that the Government’s position remains as it was on the two previous occasions we considered it. While we wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment and intent behind the amendment, as supported by my noble friend, we do not believe it would be appropriate to make this change to primary legislation. After long and careful consideration, we still believe that the current legal provisions, supported by jurisprudence, are the most effective way of securing the right to education, and we do not support these further changes. In particular, I note that Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 relate only to duties on local authorities. This could cut across the existing fourfold foundation of the right to education which, as I expounded at length at cols. 657 and 658 on17 October, also places duties on parents, the Secretary of State and governing bodies. I hesitate to read it out again, but on that occasion I also cited at length the judgment of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Bingham, in the case of Ali v Lord Grey School, a judgment issued only this year. It strongly supports the fourfold foundation which, the noble and learned Lord said, "““has endured over a long period because it has, I think, certain inherent strengths””.—[Official Report, 17/10/06; col. 657.]" We believe that seeking to elevate one of those elements risks weakening the others. Furthermore, an effect of placing a duty on local authorities to secure the right of every child to suitable education in the way proposed here could, we are advised, be used as a legal argument to cut across parental choice and the right of children to be educated either at home or at an independent school. As regards Scotland, raised by both my noble friend and the noble Baroness, it is right that there is such a provision in the law of Scotland, but it has not yet once been deployed in a legal case, so we are not in a position to judge what its effect might be on those who wished to avail themselves of an education that was not of a kind approved in other respects by the public authorities. For these reasons, I regret to say that we oppose these amendments.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 686 c16
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Codes of practice Admissions Community development Children's rights Community schools Catholicism Collective worship Education Faith schools Discrimination Local education authorities Muslims Standards Schools Teachers Religion Voluntary schools Community education
- Legislation
- Education and Inspections Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 21:15:48 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355854
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355854
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_355854