Clause 42
Education and Inspections Bill
9:30 pm
David Chaytor (Bury North, Labour)
I want to speak briefly to amendment No. 216. Itis an important amendment, the effect of which would be to remove fromthe Secretary of State the power to make regulations relating toparents’ powers to object to any aspect of the proposedadmissionarrangements.
Theintroductory section 7 of the published skeletal code is entitled“Enforcing the code”. It makes the point that the localauthority, other local schools and the admission forum have importantpowers to refer any school to the adjudicator when it fails to complywith the mandatory provisions. That is true, but the section does notrefer to the powers of parents to refer individual schools’practices to the adjudicator. Parents do have powers, but they are severely prescribed by the Secretary ofState’s powers to make regulations as to the issues on whichparents can refer problems tothe adjudicator.
There are several anomalies:for example, under the existing regulations laid down by the Secretaryof State, parents cannot refer the question of 10 per cent. selectionby aptitude to the adjudicator. However, they can refer to theadjudicator the case of a school that deliberately takes fewer pupilsthan the proposed admissions limit. To all intents and purposes theeffect of this on parents in the immediate catchment area will be thesame, but because of the regulations that the Secretary of State haslaid to prescribe these powers to parents, only one problem could bereferred by a group of parents.
It is an argument that weadvanced on earlier clauses. If we are serious about giving parents agreater voice in the development of our education system andencouraging them to challenge more frequently and more assertively thepractices of individual schools that are designed to prevent fairaccess, it seems only logical that parents should have exactly the samepowers to refer issues to the adjudicator as are now held by individualadmissions authorities, local authorities and the admissionforum.