My Lords, as we have heard, this group covers a range of issues. Inevitably, we have heard some very detailed views on different sides of the arguments covering the subjects of the amendments.

I begin with Amendment 463, moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Blower, on behalf of the noble Baroness, Lady Lister of Burtersett, which concerns making personal, social, health and economic education and relationships and sex education mandatory for all pupils under 18 in further education colleges. We absolutely recognise the importance of promoting healthy relationships to young people. That is exactly why PSHE, including sex and relationships, is taught in colleges. I strongly believe that schools play an important part in developing students’ attitudes. We recently updated the statutory guidance on relationships, sex and health education to ensure that it provides foundational knowledge for all students to thrive. Given the public consultation results and our safer streets mission, we have strengthened the content of the guidance on sexual violence.

Going further, the Government understand the challenges that young people, particularly women, face at college. This is part of a society-wide problem with sexual and domestic violence and it is why one of the Government’s five core missions is to make our streets safe again. All parts of government are contributing to the key target of halving in a decade the incidence of violence against women and girls. The FE sector has huge experience in meeting these challenges and the department’s FE student support champion is drawing on this and international comparators to create a new toolkit that will arm colleges with the confidence, skills and materials to make a real difference in the lives of their students.

To pick up on the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Hampton, with regard to the National Association for Managers of Student Services, I reassure him that the department works closely with the association on improving support for 16 to 18 year-olds, with a focus on relationships and sex education. It will be at the forefront of delivering the new RSE toolkit later this year.

Although the department has concluded that no current measure would consistently formalise post-16 RSE teaching, given the diversity of FE providers as it has developed haphazardly over more than a century, 16-to-19 institutions must follow guidance requiring that they teach RSE and health education to all 14 to 16 year-olds. To support colleges, the department has engaged a leading expert to disseminate effective RSE materials and practice. Polly Harrow is well known in the field and is working towards raising quality and consistency. A toolkit will be launched with a series of regional events in the autumn to raise awareness of this important issue.

I am also pleased to let noble Lords know that my noble friend Lady Smith recently met stake- holders from the sector, including Lucy Emmerson, chief executive of the Sex Education Forum, Janaya Walker, public affairs manager at the End Violence Against Women coalition, Faustine Petron, founder of the Make it Mandatory campaign, and Eliza Bell, senior communications co-ordinator at the Brook sexual health charity. I am pleased to let Members know that my noble friend had a very positive recent meeting with them and looks forward to continuing those discussions to see how we can work with them to take this agenda forward.

Amendment 465 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Burt, concerns the requirement for daily collective worship in schools without a religious character in England. It proposes replacing the requirement for a daily act of collective worship in non-religious maintained schools with a weekly assembly focused on spiritual, moral, social and cultural education, and extending this requirement to academies without a religious designation. The Government value collective worship and assemblies as an essential part of school life, encouraging reflection on beliefs, traditions and ethics. As mentioned by several noble Lords this evening, the right to withdraw from this remains.

Under the Education Act 2002, schools must promote spiritual, moral, social and cultural development in their curriculum. Schools already have flexibility to deliver non-religious assemblies. This amendment introduces different statutory duties on local authorities, governing bodies and head teachers, creating administrative burdens without, I must say, evidence of improving pupils’ educational experience.

I shall pick up on the comments of my noble friend Lady Thornton, who always makes an enormous contribution to these discussions, specifically with reference to her former school in Bradford. I am sure she is aware of what I will say: schools have considerable flexibility in deciding how to meet their existing statutory duty. Schools can apply to their Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education, also known as SACRE, for an exemption from the duty to provide predominantly Christian collective worship. Further, pupils over the age of 16 and the parents of those aged under 16 may, as I said, exercise their right to withdraw if they wish to do so. If children are withdrawn from collective worship, schools are required to provide supervision for them.

Amendment 471 is on a requirement for schools without a religious designation to teach about non-religious world views. I believe the noble Baroness is referring to introducing a legal requirement for agreed syllabuses of religious education to take account of teachings of non-religious beliefs.

As we have heard, Britain’s religious landscape has diversified, and a growing proportion of the population now declare themselves as having no religion, as identified by the noble Baroness and by the noble Lord, Lord Weir. The current legislation is already flexible. It allows schools to reflect that context when designing their religious education curricula and to include the teaching of “non-religious world views”. This is recognised as analogous to a religious belief, such as humanism.

The independent curriculum and assessment review is under way. The review has gathered evidence on a wide range of subjects, including religious education. As we know, it is not due to make its final recommendations until later this year. Given that, we would not want to pre-empt its recommendations on any subject, including religious education.

To sum up, we recognise the importance of relationships and sex education through personal tuition and have commissioned effective practice to maximise its impact. Existing legislation already gives schools the necessary flexibility to deliver collective worship or assemblies in ways that support pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development, and this flexibility is also guaranteed for schools designing their religious education curricula to include “non-religious world views”.

I hope noble Lords are reassured that we have considered their amendments in this area carefully. For these reasons, I ask the noble Baroness to withdraw her amendment.