Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Walmsley (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 21 July 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Education and Skills Bill.


Education and Skills Bill

I am most grateful to the Minister for his reply and for everyone who has commented. If my amendments did somehow find their way into the legislation I would not expect there to be large numbers of children seeking permission to opt out. If it meant a serious discussion with the vicar, priest or head teacher about deep issues of religion, philosophy, and so on, and the child being seriously questioned about what he or she thought and why, I do not think that too many children would want to go through that unless they seriously felt that they wanted to opt out. I cannot see it resulting in a mass opt-out. Assembly is fairly easily dealt with. The religious element could be done at the end, and the other children could do something else or go straight to their next class. Many schools do not do collective worship in any case. They vote with their feet. In response to the noble Lord, Lord Elton, my five-point plan was there to explain my position on the amendments, rather than an expectation of how parents would consider them. I must clarify—the Minister understood this—that I am not against religious education. I feel that the role of teaching that any religion is the one true one should not be done in the classroom; that should be done separately. It is important for social cohesion for all children to know that Christians do not have horns, and nor do Muslims or Hindus, but that we are all people. Learning about what different people believe and how it affects their culture is a very good thing for all children. On the question of when parents lose control of their children, I have carefully kept in the parental opt-out, so that parents have the opportunity of opting out the child. However, if the parents did not feel inclined to do that, Gillick-competent children should have that right. Clearly, I am reflecting the comments of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. I am disappointed that the Minister has not felt able to move any further forward as the time has now come to look again at the matter, which is why I have raised it. I will read his remarks with great care, but I may want to return to this on Report. In the mean time I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 225B and 225C not moved.] Clause 127 agreed to. [Amendment No. 225D not moved.] Clauses 128 and 129 agreed to.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
703 c1608 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Data protection Devolved matters Admissions Curriculum Discipline Disadvantaged Cost effectiveness Cooperation Apprentices Departmental responsibilities Adult education Equality Fees and charges Education Further education Inspections Gender Legislative competence Internet Discrimination Higher education Ethnic groups Learning disability Learning and Skills Council for England Educational institutions Home education Qualifications Private education Pupil exclusions Qualifications and Curriculum Authority Local education authorities National Assembly for Wales Pupils Minority groups Part-time education Personal, social, health and economic education Registration Travel Standards Schools Special educational needs Training Vocational guidance Young people Religion Transport Regulation Wales Religious practice Telephone services Skilled workers Travellers Welsh Government Sixth form education Department for Children, Schools and Families Pupil referral units Connexions Service Estyn Basic skills Ofqual Ofsted
Legislation
Education and Skills Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk