---

National Assembly for Wales (Legislative Competence) (Education) Order 2010

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, declared his interest when we debated the first order, and I am glad to see that the noble Lord, Lord Livsey, declared his interest as we debated the third. He will appreciate the envy with which I respond, having been born in south Wales but never having had the benefit of attending a primary school there. He has the advantage over me—but not with regard to this particular order, I hasten to add, as I hope that I am adequately briefed to answer the questions that noble Lords have asked. It will be recognised that the measure relates to school governance—an important but limited issue. Therefore, I will give clear responses to the points about the extent to which the LCO confers competence. The noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, asked one of those questions to which there is only a yes or no answer. The answer to the question of whether the order confers competence to abolish school governors is yes. The Explanatory Memorandum explains this. However, the order declares a competence but does not announce a policy—far from it. Whether the Assembly would ever put forward such a measure is, under the terms of the order, for the Assembly to decide. Of course, as will be readily anticipated, the Assembly places great emphasis on the contribution that school governing bodies make to Welsh education. Far from it having a policy intention to abolish them, it seeks ways to ensure that they fulfil their functions more effectively. There is no doubt—and I do not think that this is a party-political view: my Government have done some enhancement in recent years, but I pay due respect to the Opposition, and to the Liberal party, as well—that we all recognise that the contribution of the community to local schools, as expressed by the governing bodies, is of very great importance. There was a time when a great deal of English and Welsh education was directed from the centre, and it could be thought that governing bodies were often implementing and rubber-stamping positions that had been adopted. That was always something of a caricature, because the real authority to which governing bodies related was their local authority, not central government. In so far as there was ever a failing, it was that too many circulars on these issues would appear from departments of state. However, in recent times, greater devolving of power to governing bodies has enhanced the participating role of local communities, which has been very much to the benefit of education. So I will answer the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, factually and accurately. The order does provide for this power. However, it is no statement of policy—far from it. There is no question of the National Assembly taking that view. This is about legislative competence over the long term. Quite properly, the Assembly wants to ensure that it is equipped with powers so that any future Assembly, a long time from now, will be able to carry out the democratic decisions that the Assembly makes. That is why it wants this competence in the framework. I turn to whether the exclusion of school staffing and finance from the scope of the order is a weakness. In my introduction, I emphasised that they are excluded, but I do not think it is a weakness of the order. After all, the issue concerns school governance and, as the Explanatory Notes make clear, the order certainly permits measures that would move responsibility for staffing and/or governance to or from school governing bodies. It permits this but provides sufficient flexibility should new governance arrangements mean that the functions need to be reordered. My answer to the noble Lord, Lord Glentoran, is that under this order flexibility is sought for the potential change. The staffing and finance functions are outside the scope of the order but there is flexibility for new governance arrangements, which means that in due course functions could be reordered. I again emphasise that the noble Lord is asking a question about the Assembly's intent in seeking this legislative competence. It is not to provide for school governors to be directly involved in the payment of staff or directly involved in finance matters, because local authorities in Wales have an important role and the Welsh Assembly Government have pretty clear views on their relationships with local authorities. On the previous order I indicated how much the Assembly Government are concerned to safeguard and preserve their relationships with local authorities. As the noble Lord will be only too well aware, the Assembly Government cannot function effectively if they do not create the right relationship with local authorities. Therefore, on those issues, there is no intention of giving school governing bodies that competence at present. As for the examples of the bodies that might be created through the order, I emphasise that the competence is quite broad. It is deliberately so in order to permit the National Assembly to pass measures that could create bodies that it thinks are necessary. The bodies might provide services and support for schools and school governors as well as governor training; we can all think of organisations that are concerned with enhancing the training of governors and the extent to which this has already produced dividends. There is no doubt at all that for a very long time people joined school governing bodies and were expected to learn on the job, or that they often came along with perspectives which were pretty hidebound. It is now widely appreciated that members who serve on school governing bodies have a very significant responsibility to their local community and that training is important. That is the kind of body that we think the Assembly might reasonably want to develop. However, it is for the Assembly to make up its mind about what kind of bodies should be established. It has the breadth for that, and that is to be commended. I therefore commend the order to the Committee. Motion agreed.