Clause 5
Education and Inspections Bill
12:15 pm
Edward Leigh (Gainsborough, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 347, in clause 5, page 3, line 30, at end insert—
‘(2A) In the case of a religious school of any denomination or religion, the person employed or engaged by a local education authority under the provisions of this section must be of the same denomination or religion as the school to which he is appointed.'.
The amendment is probing, but covers an important subject. I tabled it to give the Minister an opportunity to reassure those concerned about faith schools that school improvement partners will not interfere with or affect the ethos of those schools. I have been in touch with the head teacher at Our Lady of Victory school, the primary school that one of my children attends, and Paul Barber of the Catholic Education Service. This is a useful opportunity for the Minister to reassure the Committee. The Catholic Education Service is extremely concerned about the possible impact of SIPs on the ethos of its schools. The issue, therefore, is important.
Denominational schools are voluntary of course, and the whole point of them is that the governing body should have the final say. That is particularly important for the protection of the ethos of those schools. At the moment, a committee of the governing body, appointed by the school, carries out the school appraisals and appoints an external adviser. Various mechanisms ensure that those external advisers are properly qualified. For instance, the committee can check a person’s expertise with the Cambridge Education Associates.
A missive has come from the Department saying that those external advisers, who are appointed by the schools and usually are—I would imagine—of the same denomination as the schools, will be replaced by SIPs. I would be grateful if the Minister could make it clear that there is no question of the SIPs having a role in changing the ethos of faith schools, and, indeed, that local education authorities will consult the governing bodies of faith schools to ensure that any SIPs appointed understand the ethos and will work with the school.
Generally faith schools have a very good record, academically and in every other way. Many are over-subscribed, particularly in the London area, but, presumably, some underperform academically. There might therefore be a role for what used to be an external adviser and will now be a school improvement partner to come in and give advice to a school on how to improve its academic performance, which may have nothing to do with its faith ethos.
However, we would not want these people to come in and change the ethos. The Minister may say that that is unlikely, but it is a well known fact that there are many in this House and in the education world who are fiercely opposed even to the existence of faith schools. That is not the Minister’s position and when she responds to the debate she will no doubt make clear her commitment to these schools and that of the Prime Minister, who sent his children to a faith school. I am sure the Minister will say that the Government fully support the schools, want them to expand, and that nothing concerning SIPs will affect the ethos of the schools. However, we need a pretty strong reassurance from her in that respect, because her remarks will be looked at very carefully in the world of faith schools.
I do not suggest that the words in this probing amendment are correct, as I tabled it in an attempt to be reasonable and constructive. It would probably be unreasonable to insist that a school improvement partner was of the same denomination as the school, although when Catholic schools were inspected in the past, the inspectors, too, were usually Catholic, but that was changed some years ago. I may table an amendment to enable us to discuss the matter.
Many people involved with faith schools are concerned about what they perceive to be a gradual attack on their ethos, worried that it may be the thin end of the wedge. How can we ensure that they are reassured? I suggested that SIPs should generally be of the same denomination as the school. For example, in a typical education authority there might be a number of Anglican or Catholic schools and it would not be impossible to find a school improvement partner who was a Catholic or an Anglican, supported the ethos of faith schools and was prepared to give tough and useful advice. However, there would be no question that they were opposed to the ethos of those schools in any way. I understand that the Church of England appoints roving bishops to deal with certain parishes. Perhaps we could have roving SIPs; I do not know how they would work. There must be some way of giving us assurances on this important issue.
I have said enough, as I want to give colleagues a chance to contribute. This is not a complex issue but it is very important and I want the Minister to take the amendment seriously. There is little point in having a debate on technical deficiencies in the amendment; it was tabled so that we could discuss the matter and assure the outside world that nothing we do in this Committee will affect the ethos of these very successful schools.
The reason they are so successful is not that they cherry-pick middle-class students, although that charge is often made against them, but because they have a very strong ethos that is based on their religion.