Clause 18 - Parenting contracts in cases of exclusion from school or truancy
Anti-social Behaviour Bill
9:30 am
Mr Bob Ainsworth (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office; Coventry North East, Labour)
It is treachery rather than stupidity to ask me a question like that at this time in the morning. [Laughter.] I have learnt to be wary of the hon. Gentleman over some time, and I shall come back
to him on what would happen if one parent were prepared to agree while another were not.
The threat of creating a contractual obligation and liability would make parents less likely to enter into a contract and would defeat the object of the voluntary part of the arrangements. If there is a lack of co-operation, the local education authority and governing body may, in cases of exclusion from school for serious misbehaviour, apply to the court for a free-standing parenting order. The courts may take into account any refusal to enter into or breach of a parenting contract in deciding whether to impose such an order. In cases of truancy, the local education authority or the authorised school staff could issue a penalty notice under clause 22, or the LEA could prosecute for the offence.
Amendment No. 48 would remove the necessity for LEAs and governing bodies to have regard to any guidance issued about parenting contracts in cases of exclusion from school or truancy. That would compromise our aim that parenting contracts should be used consistently across the country. We intend the guidance to advise on when to consider using parenting contracts for tackling poor behaviour, attendance or both, and when the measures would be appropriate for use in exclusion cases. Parents should be able to feel confident that they will receive similar equitable treatment, irrespective of the school that their child attends. Guidance should ensure that that is the case.
The hon. Member for Surrey Heath has reflected on the matter and thinks that it is dreadfully authoritarian. I do not think that that is the case. We are talking about the words, ''must have regard''. We are not talking about a need to comply with the letter of the guidance in every circumstance. I do not think that we are far apart in the matter. He contends that the words should be, ''should have regard''. I do not think that the measure is quite as draconian as many people believe. The local education authority or governing body need not slavishly follow the guidance if it is inappropriate in an individual case. If there is good reason in an individual case, the local education authority can depart from the guidance.