Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Sutherland of Houndwood (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 30 June 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Education Bill.


Education Bill

My Lords, I am happy to find myself in my more natural position of supporting amendments rather than throwing four anchors astern. I pay tribute to the eloquence and passion of my noble friend Lord Laming and the experience on which that has been built. At Second Reading, I asked a specific question, which was that if there was a possibility of permanent exclusion—and it is included twice in the relevant clause in this legislation—there had to be a plan B. If any pupil is permanently excluded, there is a major problem that we cannot afford to put out into the wilderness without knowing the direction of travel that society ought to, and will want to, take. The noble Lord, Lord Laming, has given us one possible solution to this—and I should like to think further about the details of Amendment 100—but there must be a solution, a plan B, and we need to know. If someone is permanently excluded, not simply from school but, as mentioned in Clause 2, from a pupil referral unit, we have a problem. What is plan B?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
728 c269-70GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Bullying Children in care Appeals Classroom assistants Education Further education Inspections Gender Discrimination Ethnic groups Learning disability Educational institutions ADHD Pilot schemes Pupil exclusions Powers Pupils Mobile phones Minority groups Standards Schools Teachers Special educational needs Right of search Social services Students Ofsted
Legislation
Education Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk