Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord De Mauley (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 15 October 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill.


Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill

My Lords, Amendments 216 and 218 are derived from concerns raised by the Association of Colleges in relation to Part 6, which gives separate legal status to the 93 sixth-form colleges and places them under the control of the DCSF. Those concerns arise from the fact that the clause will require sixth-form colleges to have a closer relationship with their local authorities than is proposed for other colleges. Perhaps your Lordships will forgive me if I deal with Amendment 218 before Amendment 216. Amendment 218 would mean that the responsible local education authority could use its proposed power to appoint a member to a governing body of a sixth-form college after, ""consultation with the said governing body"." We believe that that would allow sixth-form colleges to retain the independence and autonomy that have been integral to their success. We are concerned that, without that provision, sixth-form colleges may be encouraged to become overly centred on the needs of the local authority and the so-called home centre. We suggest that that would be damaging, because part of the success of sixth-form colleges is due to their ability to recruit across local authority boundaries and become centres of excellence. Although the Bill does not prevent that, we are concerned that too many ties to the local authority may result in the sixth-form college becoming home-centric and reduce its freedom and desire to recruit from further afield. Amendment 216 is in the same vein of flexibility. New Section 33D(3) in Schedule 8 means that an application to convert a sixth-form college corporation into a further education corporation cannot be made by the governing body of the relevant body for a period of five years after the body has been declared a sixth-form college corporation. Does the Minister agree that that is somewhat restrictive? Does she not agree with the assessment of the Association of Colleges that a period of two years might be more suitable? We suggest that that would allow much more flexibility, which is especially important given that much of the reason behind the success of those institutions is their ability to innovate, adapt and utilise the flexibility that their independence gives them. We think that it is important to nurture those traits, which help to develop centres of excellence, not constrain them. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
713 c363-4 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Assessments Curriculum Apprentices Adult education Equality Finance Fees and charges Higher education Learning disability Offenders Qualifications Prisons National curriculum tests Political impartiality Statistics Standards Special educational needs Training Sports Vocational education Sixth form colleges Young People's Learning Agency Ofqual
Legislation
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk