Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 20 July 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Education Bill.


Education Bill

My Lords, I rise to oppose the Motion that Clause 36 stand part of the Bill and to speak to the Motion on whether Schedule 11 should be agreed. These amendments go to the heart of the difficulties that we have with this Bill. In seeking to restructure education provision in this country, far from decentralising power to parents and local authorities, as we have just debated, the Secretary of State is taking decision-making away from them. Flexibility and parental choice are being restricted rather than embraced and welcomed. Clause 36 and Schedule 11 illustrate this point perfectly. In future, there will be a presumption that any new school will be an academy. The power of local authorities to consult widely, to plan for a spread of school choices and to take account of parental demand is massively curtailed. Under this clause, when a new school is needed, local authorities will have a duty to seek proposals to set up an academy and identify a possible site. They must obtain the Secretary of State’s consent—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c442-3GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Curriculum Buildings Design Equality Education Governing bodies Inspections Exemptions Faith schools Languages Local government Public appointments Pupils Primary education Standards Vocational guidance Religion Safety Students Academies Free schools Ofsted Maintained schools
Legislation
Education Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk