Clause 7
Education and Inspections Bill
9:00 am
Greg Mulholland (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education & Skills; Leeds North West, Liberal Democrat)
Welcome back to the Chair after the Easter break,Mr. Cook.
I want to reiterate a point that my hon. Friend the Member for Brent, East (Sarah Teather) made absolutely clear when she spoke to our amendment, which is that it is very much a probing amendment. We simply do not feel that we have got any further forward in trying to establish suitable criteria for the kind of organisations that will set up charitable trusts in order to establish schools under the Bill.
Recently, we and Conservative Front Benchers have moved probing amendments, and we were all pleased that the Under-Secretary responded to them in the tone in which they were presented. He provided the Committee with a lot of useful information that led us to feel quite happy to withdraw them. [Interruption.] I remember that at Leeds city council we were fined £5 every time a mobile phone went off. Perhaps that is something that you would like to consider for the Committee, Mr. Cook, but of course it is a matter entirely for you.
I really do not understand why the Minister for Schools and the Government are being so cagey about the issue. Surely it is perfectly reasonable for the Government to provide an idea of the kind of organisations deemed suitable to set up the charitable trusts to establish new schools. Surely it is vital that we have that information, not only in this Committee but in the public domain, so that there are no issues of confidence, such as there are among the teaching professions—as I am sure the Minister for Schools is well aware—and among sections of the public about the kind of organisations that have been linked to setting up charitable trusts.
I want to ask the Minister a question. Again, we are probing; all we want is to get some idea about the matter. Are there no types of organisation that she would deem unsuitable to set up a charitable trust to form a new school? We have had mention of fast-food and tobacco companies, and also a certain religious sect. The issue is so important because of the influence that those companies have. That is not to say that private companies should not be involved in setting up schools and should not provide some funding; that is a different debate, and not one that we are having now. However, given that the Bill means that they will have influence, surely it is appropriate to specify firm criteria for the kind of organisations that should be involved.
There is also a question about the charitable trusts themselves. There is a lack of confidence that the position of trustees is sufficiently watertight in respect of the people having involvement in schools. It is possible for someone to be a trustee of a charity when they have spent convictions or are a former bankrupt. Can we have some reassurance about that issue? We need to create a framework to ensure that people who set up charitable trusts to run schools are the kind of people that we would all want to run schools.
The Minister will be well aware of the case brought to our attention by the Daily Mirror in which a convicted paedophile set up a charitable trust, so there are issues relating to the Charity Commission. Will she examine the matter and reassure us that the kind of people who set up charitable trusts to run schools are those whom we would want to be involved in our schools? Will she give us some information on that point? Will she give us an idea about what she deems to be suitability, above and beyond what is necessary to become a trustee of a charitable trust? That provision is not sufficient to give people confidence that the organisations that will be bidding to set up new schools involve the kind of people that we want to run our schools.