Clause 44
12:45 pm
Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset and North Poole, Liberal Democrat)
The two amendments go together. They would remove the subjective element in the decision about whether provision would involve disproportionate expenditure and replace it with an objective test that the authority would have to satisfy on the basis of national guidance. Rather fortuitously, amendment 254 uses wording that we have discussed this morning and that is already in the Bill, so it is difficult to imagine that the Minister will disagree with it.
Under clause 44, proposed new sections 17B, 17C and 17D of the Education Act 1996 are effectively re-enactments of sections 3A, 3B and 3C of the Learning and Skills Act 2000, with very little difference in the wording. Proposed new section 17A of the 1996 Act is the section under which local education authorities will acquire the duties and responsibilities of the Learning and Skills Council, and that in turn is based on section 3D of the 2000 Act.
The amendment would remove the subjective element in the decision about whether provision will involve disproportionate expenditure and replace it with an objective test that an authority would have to satisfy on the basis of national guidance. Given that the Bill will replace provisions that give a reasonable assurance of a nationally consistent approach, it cannot be right now to adopt terminology that would allow each authority to decide subjectively for itself.
Although I am very much in favour of local decision making, it is important to have some comparability throughout the country. In fact, the deletion that I propose would clarify that the test is objective. That is the only way to ensure that the provision is consistent with proposed new subsection 17A(6) of the 1996 Act, which would oblige authorities to follow the Secretary of State’s guidance. I hope that the Minister will consider the amendments favourably, bearing in mind that, following the previous discussion this morning, there is a certain logic to them.