---

Education and Skills Bill

Amendment No. 184A is in my name. Although it takes a slightly different tack from the other amendments in this group, I should like to speak to it now as it is one of the amendments to Clause 60. Subsection (7) attempts to make it an offence, liable to a fine on summary conviction, for somebody who, "““obstructs a person in carrying out or participating in the inspection””." My heart sinks when I see this clause in the Bill. There has never to my knowledge been an offence before in refusing to allow inspection. As one who was an HMI for a very large part of my career and was Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, responsible for the training of new inspectors, I say most forcefully that the importance of an inspector going into a school—whether an Ofsted inspector or one of Her Majesty’s inspectors—is that they go there with the authority of the law and with the authority of the Secretary of State behind them. They go there also to contribute to the quality and life of the school. To go there with the force of an offence behind them completely changes the relationship. The relationship ought to be one in which the inspector goes in with courtesy, good will and an intention genuinely to contribute to the life and quality of education in the school. For years, when training a new HMI I used to say, ““The fact that you have the authority of the Secretary of State behind you means that you never stamp your foot and assert that authority. There are hundreds of ways in which you can assert that authority without being bullying or bossy””. In my early days as a local HMI, I remember vividly encountering a lecturer in an FE college who decided that over his dead body would I be allowed into his room to inspect. He stood in the corridor holding out his arms saying, ““You shall not come into my room. Under no circumstances are you allowed””. I talked to him for a few minutes and said, ““I am very sorry you feel that way and I understand that it is threatening and uncomfortable to have someone sitting in your room””. I assured him that I would not report personally on him but that I was there to observe the learning. I said, ““Obviously, at the moment there is no point in disrupting your class by coming in, but I should like very much to come in later this afternoon. Let us talk about that when you have had a chance to think about it””. Indeed, he did. We talked later on and I explained the functions of inspection. I asked whether he had a particular group doing some interesting work that I could learn from by observing. At that point, he invited me in. I firmly believe that that is the way it should happen. I would hate to see the thing being turned into a criminal offence with a fine attached. That changes the relationship between an inspector and the school into a foot-stamping exercise: ““We are government inspectors and we have come to check you out””. I hope very much that in his reply the Minister will agree that this clause can be changed and that we can restore the relationship of fellow professionals working together for the good of the children in the school.