Jacqui Smith (Minister of State (Schools and 14-19 Learners), Department for Education and Skills; Redditch, Labour)

May I say what a pleasure it is to be back after our snack break? I have a suspicion, however, that the hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Mr. Hayes), who is not yet here, will have fitted in more than a snack.

Moving away from our digestion, I remind hon. Members that before the suspension I was, I hope, reassuring them about the provisions already in the special educational needs code of practice which require a list of schools, including special schools, in an area to be brought to the attention of parents during the statementing process.

I intended to talk about the fact that the guidance to local authorities on the provision of choice advisers already states that such advisers will be expected to have an understanding of special needs policy and provision in the area for children with special educational needs. Advisers will also be expected to draw on the knowledge and expertise of local parent partnership services in providing advice to parents. I hope that my comments reassure hon. Members that we are clear that choice advisers have an important role in respect of children with special educational needs and that we have made that clear in the choice advice guidance.

Amendment No. 192 relates to monitoring and quality assurance of the work of choice advisers. We have already made provision for that through the choice advice support and quality assurance network, which will be operated by the voluntary and community sector. That network is external to and independent of local authorities and will have a key role in ensuring the impartiality of the advice given by choice advisers. It will examine the quality of what is offered.

In addition to that work, we plan to contract for formal external evaluation of choice advice. That evaluation is likely to focus on issues including the effectiveness of choice advice delivery and operations; the effectiveness of our measures to ensure independence of choice advice; the impact of local authority and/or school performance management arrangements on choice advisers; parental perception of the quality of that advice; and the impact of the  advice on admissions patterns for disadvantaged children and on social mobility.

With regard to amendment No. 388, a key element of providing choice advisers for parents will be ensuring that the individuals appointed receive full training to enable them to provide the advice that parents need. I can assure the Committee that SEN and disability legislation, along with admissions law, the school admissions code and other equality legislation, will be part of that training. This is a broader requirement than the amendment proposes and will also cover schools’ own descriptions of what they offer contained in the online school profile, their ethos and any special facilities, including those for children with special educational needs and disabled children.

New clause 46 and amendment No. 387 relate to professional standards for teachers. The Secretary of State already has the power to set professional standards for teachers and does so in secondary legislation and associated guidance. There is no need to set out specific standards in primary legislation, but I assure hon. Members that the current standards for teachers are under review. It is proposed that, once revised, they will include a standard that requires teachers to know and comply with current legislation on the well-being of children and young people, a standard that requires teachers to know and understand the role of others when dealing with children who have special educational needs and/or disabilities and a standard that requires teachers to communicate effectively with parents and carers. That provision, too, will be stronger than the amendment, which talks only about people demonstrating

“an understanding of special educational needs and disability legislation”.

I hope that I have reassured hon. Members on the amendments and that they will not press them.

Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education; Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Conservative)

I am grateful for that response from the Minister and I am reassured by some things. The external evaluation for choice advisers is a useful measure to ensure that the quality of advice being given is good. I am also reassured by what she had to say about the training of choice advisers and by her comments regarding standards for teachers. I understand why they are set out in secondary legislation, but in this Committee we can only table amendments to primary legislation. I was reassured by her mention of the current positions under review, and I was content with what she had to say about the new words concerning professional standards in relation to children with special educational needs and disabilities.

However, I am not yet convinced by the Minister’s response concerning the requirement in amendment No. 47 that choice advisers give full information regarding the provision of special schools available in the geographical area. Committee members have seen too many examples of parents being denied this information. It will send a clear message if we include in the Bill the provisions in amendment No. 47. I was particularly struck by the real-life experience outlined by my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Bedfordshire (Mrs. Dorries). In light of that, and other experiences  from outside the House of which I have been made aware, I would like to press the amendment to a Division.

Christopher Chope (Christchurch, Conservative)

Order. Before I call the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh) to move amendment No. 204, I should apologise to the hon. Member for Bury, North for the fact that amendment No. 448, in his name, has been left off the amendment paper in error. In any event, the amendment has not been selected.