---

Education and Inspections Bill

I would like to thank the Minister, who stepped into the proceedings on the Bill part way through, and the Liberal Democrat spokespeople. The proceedings in the main Chamber have been very pleasant and good-natured even though the Bill is highly controversial. Amendment No. 1 adjusts the wording of clause 2 so that it is in line with that used in section 14 of the Education Act 1996. It changes the word ““powers”” to ““functions””, and it is something spotted by Conservatives in Committee, so we are very proud of the amendment. Clause 8 deals with proposals to establish new community schools. Amendment No. 5 allows a wider range of criteria to be used by the Secretary of State when deciding whether to consent to such proposals. In another place, Lord Adonis stated that this was to allow the criteria to be used to be subject to broader consultation. Illustrative regulations showed that the kind of criteria that the Government envisage are ones such as the range of SEN provision and curricular specialisms. Our attitude to community schools is clear: we subscribe totally to the view of the White Paper, where it said:"““At the heart of this new vision are Trust schools…We will encourage all primary and secondary schools to be self-governing and to acquire a Trust””." Since that was published, much has changed. New community schools were to be forbidden in the original proposal, but the Government decided to allow the Secretary of State to permit local authorities to propose them. The Government then decided to allow certain local authorities to have an automatic right to establish new community schools, and others the right to ask permission, provided that other criteria were met. Although we would have preferred the Government to stick with the original position, I am pleased that there has been no meaningful watering down of the proposals since the original publication of the Bill. It is clearer if the criteria for the establishment of community schools are set out in regulation rather than being left to the discretion of the Secretary of State. I doubt that the criteria that the Government are proposing are much different from those that the Secretary of State would have used. I also expect very few local authorities to try to set up a new community school, given the clear statements of Government policy against them. Amendments Nos. 55 to 61 remove an ambiguity in the Bill as originally drafted. At present, the Bill uses the phrase ““normal school hours”” to refer to the time when a child is at school, but that is ambiguous. Section 32 of the Education Act 2002 gives school governing bodies the authority to set the time of school sessions, rather than hours. Given that some schools permit pupils to leave the premises during the day, it is better to use the term ““sessions”” rather than ““hours””. The Bill will give teachers in schools the power to use reasonable force. Clause 86 gives members of staff at a school the power to use reasonable force for the purpose of preventing a pupil from committing an offence or prejudicing the maintenance of good order. Lords amendment No. 64 extends the power to use reasonable force to further education institutions and means that members of staff at those institutions will enjoy the same freedom to use force as their counterparts in schools, which we welcome. Lords amendment No. 66 inserts a new section into the Education Act 2002 placing restrictions on people participating in the management of independent schools. We support that amendment. Lords amendment No. 73 fulfils a commitment made by the Government to accept the recommendation that amendments to primary legislation under clause 153 be subject to the affirmative procedure. Given the substantial nature of the body of primary legislation that is to be change, we think the use of the affirmative procedure is appropriate.