Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Northbourne (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 22 June 2009. It occurred during Committee proceeding and Debate on bill on Welfare Reform Bill.


Welfare Reform Bill

I strongly support the amendment, particularly because it raises a fundamental principle: do we or do we not believe that parents are responsible for procuring or providing the education for their child? I also support it because it is a specific example of the general principle enshrined in the amendment that I moved in Committee several sittings ago, that the implementation of these arrangements should always be sympathetic to the best interests of the child. My hope and belief is that that was the Government’s intention, because if it is not it is simply a back door to doing away with home education. I ask the Minister whether, as it seems to me, home education would fall within new Section 2F(2) in Clause (2): ""A direction under subsection (1) given to any person … must be reasonable, having regard to the person’s circumstances"." Would "the person’s circumstances" include home education? Would the new section be sympathetic to it?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
711 c362GC 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Staff Disability Childcare Carers Advisory services Childminding Women Employment Jobseeker's allowance Income support Jobcentres Domestic abuse Interviews Income Jobcentre Plus Earnings rules Home education Mental illness Medical treatments Pilot schemes Parents Lone parents Social security benefits Social security Welfare tax credits Schools Special educational needs Training Unemployed people Labour market Employment and support allowance
Legislation
Welfare Reform Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk