Jim Knight (Minister of State, Department for Education and Skills; South Dorset, Labour)

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Frank Cook (Stockton North, Labour)

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Government new clause 28—Procedure for giving directions under section 96 of SSFA 1998.

Government new clause 29—Directions to admit child to specified school: supplementary provisions.

Government new clause 30—Looked after children to whom section 87(2) of SSFA 1998 applies: references to adjudicator.

Government new clause 31—Provision of advice by adjudicator.

Government new clause 33—Power of assembly to make regulations about admission of looked after children.

Government amendment No. 328.

Government amendment No. 358.

Jim Knight (Minister of State, Department for Education and Skills; South Dorset, Labour)

These amendments complement existing provision in the School Standards and Framework Act, requiring local authorities in the normal admission round to give first priority for school places to looked-after children. They follow a commitment made on Second Reading. New clause 27 amends section 97 of the 1998 Act to give local authorities the power to direct an admission authority to admit a child it is looking after to the school best suited to meet their needs when the need for a place arises at any time during the school year.

Looked-after children are among the most vulnerable in our society. As a group they tend to have low levels of educational attainment compared with their peers. Only 9 per cent. gained five good GCSEs in 2004 compared with 54 per cent of all children, and a relatively small number, just 5 per cent, go on to higher education compared with almost one third of all 19-year-olds.

We know from the social exclusion unit’s report, “A better education for children in care”, that one reason looked-after children underachieve in education is that their lives are characterised by instability and they spend too much time out of school. We also know that looked-after children move schools more often than other children as a result of frequent changes of placement. As a consequence, they are more likely to attend schools that are not equipped to meet their needs, or in some cases they are not able to obtain a school place at all.

That is why we are giving local authorities in their role as corporate parent the power to direct any admission authority for a maintained school in England to admit a looked-after child even where the school is already full. This will ensure that looked-after children are always admitted to the school that can best meet their needs.

I turn to new clause 28. Under section 97 of the 1998 Act, a governing body of a school that has been directed to admit a child by the local authority under section 96 may refer that direction to the Secretary of State, who may determine whether the school must admit the child or not. The amendment amends section 97 so that in future all such referrals will be made to the schools adjudicator in England and the National Assembly in Wales. Such referrals will be allowed only on the grounds that the admission of the child would seriously prejudice the provision of efficient education or the efficient use of resources. The adjudicator could agree the direction or decide that another school should admit the child having consulted that school. It is imperative that suitable school places are found for those vulnerable children as soon as possible, which is why the new clause provides a mechanism for such a speedy decision to be made about a suitable alternative school if the adjudicator overturns a direction.

New clause 29 makes some consequential amendments to section 96 of the 1998 Act to take account of the changes to the responsibilities for deciding referrals about section 96 directions. It also amends section 94 of that Act to prevent parents appealing against a direction to place a looked-after child and makes provision for regulations to be made requiring the adjudicator to consult prescribed persons before making a direction using those powers. Regulations may also require admission authorities to provide information requested by the adjudicator.

New clause 30 amends the 1998 Act to deal with looked-after children for whom section 87 of that Act applies: those children who have been excluded from two or more schools. Section 95 of the Act provides that a local authority—that is, the admission authority for a school—must allow the governing body of the school a right of appeal against its decision to admit a child who has been twice excluded. The new clause removes that requirement in the case of looked-after children and provides that the governing body may instead refer the matter to the schools adjudicator who may either uphold or overturn the direction and name another school.

New clause 31 amends section 25 of the 1998 Act, providing a general power for the Secretary of State to seek advice from the adjudicator on the admission of children to schools. This will mean that in addition to advice in relation to looked-after children the adjudicator will provide advice on matters relating to the admission of children to schools as specified by the Secretary of State. It provides for greater consistency as all referrals about directions will be considered by the adjudicator and will help to reduce the casework burden on the Department.

New clause 33 provides the National Assembly for Wales with the power to make regulations relating to the admission of looked-after children. The amendments complement the procedures in England  but recognise that the Assembly should decide for Wales whether and how they should be implemented there. It is a wide-ranging regulation power giving what we think is sufficient scope for the National Assembly to decide for itself what procedures it wishes to adopt.

As a group, looked-after children have complex needs, which is why we are committed to improving outcomes for them. The Children Act 2004 placed a specific duty on local authorities to promote the educational achievements of looked-after children. The Bill will complement that duty and ensure that looked-after children are found suitable school places as quickly as possible.

Amendment No. 328 is consequential. Amendment No. 358 adds to clause 164 and has the effect of giving the National Assembly the power to make its regulations two months following the passing of the Bill. For the reasons I have set out, I hope that that the Committee will support the amendments.

Annette Brooke (Children & the Family, Cross-Portfolio and Non-Portfolio Responsibilities; Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

I welcome my near neighbour to his new position this morning, and hopefully for a long time to come. I welcome the new clauses even though we know that looked-after children grow up and can succeed against all the odds—there are some remarkable stories. But why should this group of young people have to fight the odds all the way through their lives? I hope that this relatively small measure will make a big difference. The statistics on the outcomes and life chances for this group of people which we, collectively, have let down over a long period are well known and do not need to be rehearsed yet again.

I have a specific question for the Minister. I had a constituency case involving adopted children. One cannot time when such children arrive in a household, and because they arrived after the closing date for applications the local school five minutes away was full and they could not get in. They were from a troubled background and needed support. Perhaps a provision is tucked away in the wording of the amendments, but would adopted children arriving in June, way after the January deadline, be able to get into a school that was classified as full with perhaps 30 in the class already? That is an important point and it is sequential to the provisions for looked-after children.

I should also like to place on the record again my special concern for the young carers of disabled parents, who need access to their nearest school. They are not quite in the same category, but they are important none the less. I hope to be able to raise awareness of the particular issues facing young carers throughout the passage of the Bill.

Frank Cook (Stockton North, Labour)

Order. I ought to point out to the Committee that there will be a debate on young carers at a later stage in the Bill.

Annette Brooke (Children & the Family, Cross-Portfolio and Non-Portfolio Responsibilities; Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

I shall leave my remarks at that, then, Mr. Cook.

James Clappison (Hertsmere, Conservative)

I am happy to echo the Minister’s sentiments about the position of looked-after children, which for a long time has been a great disappointment within our education system. Coupled with his proposals for directing looked-after children into schools, would he go as far as to express a strong wish to see an improvement in the academic and all-round performance of looked-after children?

Jim Knight (Minister of State, Department for Education and Skills; South Dorset, Labour)

The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke) raised an interesting question about adopted children. My understanding is that they would not technically fall into the category of children looked after by the local authority. I can check that out and get back to her, and copy the information to the Committee. I heard your advice, Mr. Cook, that we will be discussing young carers at a later date.

To respond to the comment made by hon. Member for Hertsmere (Mr. Clappison), we are certainly concerned to ensure that the educational performance of looked-after children improves. We hope that the proposed measures will go some way towards achieving that, but they are not by any means the only way in which we can do so. The whole philosophy of our educational reforms is to personalise education for every child so that all children, including looked-after children, can achieve the best possible outcome for them as individuals. I hope that on that basis that the Committee will support the amendments.