---

Education and Skills Bill

The noble Lord, Lord Elton, asked me how provision for excluded pupils had improved in recent years. I shall supply him in correspondence with the information that we have about the amount being spent in this area, which has improved dramatically. However, I can tell him that in recent years we have made two big changes, which have significantly improved the situation. The first is the requirement for full-time provision for pupils who have been excluded permanently, which did not used to be the case, and that has led to a very big increase in spending in this area. The second is the change that we made in the Education and Inspections Act that required local authorities to provide suitable full-time education for all pupils excluded temporarily from the sixth day of exclusion, as opposed to—I believe, from memory—the 15th day. Again, that has led to a significant increase in the quality and quantity of provision for pupils temporarily excluded. As I said, previously a requirement to provide for those pupils did not kick in until fully three weeks’ worth of exclusion had taken place. Perhaps I may deal, first, with Amendment No. 230A in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley. This amendment seeks to give a statutory right of representation and information to pupils of any age in their exclusion proceedings. We are sympathetic to the intentions behind the amendment and have given schools a clear steer in statutory guidance that pupils should feel involved in decisions that affect their future and that they should be heard wherever possible. This includes being consulted and being able to participate in the exclusion process, and we have put in place a series of safeguards to ensure that that takes place. All schools are required to have a published discipline and behaviour policy in place setting out the standards of behaviour and sanctions for any breach. The exclusions guidance, to which by law all head teachers, governing bodies and appeal panels must have regard and which sets out in detail advice to head teachers on dealing with exclusions, gives significant weight to children’s participation. The guidance encourages head teachers, before excluding pupils, to inform them of the reasons for their exclusion and to inform them of the length of the exclusion, if temporary, or to say whether it is permanent, and it also encourages head teachers to give pupils the opportunity to have their say. However, there are circumstances where it may not be possible for head teachers to question pupils and where it is imperative that they are removed immediately from the school site in order to ensure the safety of the other pupils in the school. Where pupil or staff safety is threatened, as, for example, in the case of a pupil carrying a knife or an assault on another person, it may not always be appropriate for the head teacher to speak to the pupil before removal. Generally, the guidance encourages pupils to participate at all stages of the exclusion process, where appropriate, and with their parent’s permission. I understand that there are concerns relating to the wording ““with parent’s permission”” in the exclusion guidance, where the parent could refuse to allow their child to participate in the exclusion process. In the light of these concerns, we have committed to revise the guidance to remove this restriction. The revised guidance will make it clear that, as long as pupils are of an age where they can understand the process, they should be strongly encouraged to participate alongside their parents. This change will come into effect from this September, as we are currently revising the guidance. Amendment No. 230B in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, proposes to give pupils of any age a right of appeal and a right to independent representation, possibly through an advocate. Placing new requirements on local authorities to arrange and meet the costs of independent advocates for pupils and parents who wished to make representations would place additional financial and administrative burdens on local authorities, which they would have to meet from within their existing resources. It would not be appropriate to impose this additional burden on them. On the aspect of the noble Baroness’s amendment that would give pupils of any age the right of appeal, which is also covered in Amendments Nos. 228E and 230A, I note that Scotland and Wales have given pupils under the age of 18 a right of appeal themselves, not simply one exercised by their parents. Scotland did this in primary legislation in 2000, while Wales did so in 2004 in regulations. Both have imposed conditions relating to a pupil’s age and understanding. I shall reflect further on the Scottish and Welsh experience over the summer, taking up the injunction of the noble Lord, Lord Elton, that we learn from good practice in Scotland and Wales. The Government will consider the case for such a change in England.