Clause 214
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill
2:15 am
Christopher Chope (Christchurch, Conservative)
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: amendment 373, in clause 215, page 124, line 3, at end insert—
‘(1A) In considering a matter within its remit, the SSSNB must have regard to the desirability of promoting school autonomy.’.
Amendment 374, in clause 217, page 124, line 35, at end add—
‘(3) On making an order under subsection (2)(a), the Secretary of State must publish a statement explaining the predicted impact of the order on school autonomy.’.
Amendment 376, in clause 220, page 126, line 28, at end insert—
‘(d) the agreement fails to give due consideration to the desirability of promoting school autonomy.’.
Amendment 375, in clause 220, page 126, line 29, at end add—
‘(7) On making an order under subsection (2)(a), the Secretary of State must publish a statement explaining the predicted impact of the order on school autonomy.’.
Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister, Children, Schools and Families; Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
These five amendments make the same point, but apply to different clauses on the School Support Staff Negotiating Body. They would ensure that the Secretary of State and the SSSNB have regard to the desirability of promoting school autonomy at all points in the decision-making process. They require the SSSNB to have regard to that point when making a decision and require the Secretary of State to make a statement on school autonomy when ratifying any agreement. They would also enable the Secretary of State to refer the agreement back to the SSSNB if it fails to take account of this issue.
Our concern is that schools that are autonomous and value their autonomy and freedom should not have that autonomy undermined by the existence of the SSSNB. When they enter into negotiations, the autonomy of schools must not be jeopardised by a national pay-bargaining agreement.
Jim Knight (Minister of State (Schools and Learners), Department for Children, Schools and Families; South Dorset, Labour)
I appreciate the hon. Gentleman’s point. The member organisations that make up the negotiating body will of course include representatives of employers of school support staff, representatives of local government employers, FASNA, the Church of England education division and the Catholic Education Service.
During the oral evidence sessions, we heard from FASNA, which represents the governing bodies that are employers of support staff. It explained the need for any agreements reached by the negotiating body to include an appropriate level of flexibility. That flexibility is needed for schools to continue to choose the specific roles of their support staff and to deploy them in a way that meets the school’s particular needs. Unison said it was confident that
“flexibility can be built into it... Schools will be able to determine what their staffing structure is, what level of staff they want and what jobs they want the staff to do.”——[Official Report, Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Public Bill Committee, 5 March 2009; c. 146, Q88.]
It is not only self-governing schools that will need that flexibility. Community voluntary aided schools, community special schools and maintained nursery schools all need flexibility to manage their staff in ways that allow them to address the challenges they face. The whole school work force must be managed in a way that supports personalised learning and development and focuses on pupil attainment.
There are already sufficient safeguards in the way that the voting membership is arranged to ensure that the needs of employee and employer will be catered for in any agreement. That will include the safeguarding of autonomy. There will be a fair and equal system with both sides voting on agreements. Clause 217 allows the Secretary of State to refer an agreement back to the SSSNB for a reconsideration if he thinks that it would be inappropriate to ratify it. Clause 220 allows him to refer an agreement that has been revised or resubmitted following reconsideration back to the SSSNB for further consideration if he believes that it would not be practicable to implement it. The Secretary of State may use that provision if he considers that an agreement fails to provide appropriate flexibility.
For those reasons, I do not think that the amendments are necessary. I ask the hon. Gentleman to withdraw the amendment.
Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister, Children, Schools and Families; Bognor Regis and Littlehampton, Conservative)
I listened carefully to the Minister’s response. He appears to have provided some reassurance. His words were read rapidly into the record. With the reservation that I would like to read them carefully at a better hour of the day, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.