---

Education and Skills Bill

moved Amendment No. 209: 209: After Clause 141, insert the following new Clause— ““Exclusions: pupil representations and access to information Before section 52(3)(a) of the Education Act 2002 (c. 32) (exclusion of pupils) insert— ““(za) requiring the responsible body to— (i) notify the pupil of the exclusion, or the proposed exclusion; (ii) enable the pupil to have an opportunity to make representations in relation to their exclusion or proposed exclusion; and (ii) provide all information that may be relevant to such representations in language capable of being readily understood by, or explained to, the pupil himself, having particular regard to any special educational need the child might have,””.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 209, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 210. These amendments are about the right of a young person to represent themselves in exclusion proceedings from school, to receive all the appropriate information and to have an advocate speak for them, if that is what they wish and need. I am very pleased to say that after we tabled these same amendments in Committee there was a development. The Minister wrote to me on 14 October, saying that she is minded to move in the direction that we would like to see. Indeed, she would like to move on a broader front than the specific issue of children’s rights to represent themselves which we have raised in these two amendments. This is a response to the report of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child of 3 October in which it set out its concerns that children have no right to appeal in their exclusion or appeal the decisions of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal. The UN committee recommended that the Government ensure that children who are able to express their views have the right to appeal against their exclusion as well as the right to appeal to SENDIST, in particular those who are in alternative care. The Minister pointed out that there were several areas in the educational field, not just exclusion appeals, where young people might be given such a right. She has undertaken to consult on the matter in early 2009 and then come back on the issue. I replied to her letter and gave her a number of areas on which I should like to ask her some questions tonight. She has notice of the questions, which are as follows. Will it be a three-month formal consultation, in line with the Cabinet Office consultation code, or will it be a different period of consultation? What will be its scope? Is the consultation on proposals for how to give children the right to appeal or on whether they should be able to appeal—or do different things apply to different rights of appeal? Will the consultations be on both the right to appeal exclusions from school and the decisions of SENDIST? Will it be for both primary and secondary schools, or are secondary pupils alone regarded as being capable of making such appeals? Will the consultation explore the use of advocates as an aide to children, particularly those with communication difficulties? Will it simply cover England or England and Wales? What would be the response to Scotland and Northern Ireland, or is it a completely devolved issue? How does this link with the developments in Wales that we already have to allow children to appeal exclusions? They are consulting on enabling them to appeal to SENDIST as well, so they are ahead of us in this particular respect, as they are in many others relating to children. What efforts will be made to engage children and young people in the consultation, rather than just adults or their carers, and especially those who have already been excluded and gone through the experience of not having a voice in the matter? How will the Government involve young people with special needs? I also gave the Minister notice that I would ask her some questions about SENDIST, because considerable concerns have been raised about the tribunals that have been lumped in with mental health tribunals and others. We received a letter from a couple of parents expressing severe concerns about the new system of tribunals. They said that they were unfair to children with special needs as they will be more complex and costly and that, for the vast majority of parents who cannot afford legal representation, their chances of obtaining justice would be much reduced. With a second level of hearing for the case management directions as well as no limitation on the number of witnesses, there will be significant additional costs. It is important that access to this sort of appeal is not limited to those who can afford legal representation from somebody who understands the complexity of the system. It is important, too, that the further complexity does not extend the time that these procedures take, because young people are desperate sometimes for their needs to be met. That is why their parents are appealing on their behalf; and, in the future, they may be able to do it themselves, subject to the results of the consultation. Those are my questions. I very much welcome and thank the Minister for agreeing to look further into this issue, because it is important. I look forward to seeing the scope of the consultation. At this late hour, I should be happy if wishes to write to me to answer the questions and puts a copy in the Library. I beg to move.