Clause 5 - Interpretation of chapter 2

[Part I]Education Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 6:45 pm on 11 December 2001.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Graham Brady Graham Brady Shadow Minister (Education) 6:45, 11 December 2001

I beg to move amendment No. 67, in page 4, line 5, leave out 'prescribed criteria' and insert

'criteria prescribed by the Secretary of State after consultation with such organisations or bodies as he considers appropriate and'.

Photo of Mrs Irene Adams Mrs Irene Adams Chair, Scottish Affairs Committee, Chair, Scottish Affairs Committee

With this we may discuss amendment No. 9, in page 4, line 8, leave out subsection (2).

Photo of Graham Brady Graham Brady Shadow Minister (Education)

Under amendment No. 67, I again seek to put a little flesh on the bones of the Bill. The amendment would substitute a slightly broader wording for the current phrase, and I had a clear purpose in tabling it. Under subsection (1), if a school is

''of a prescribed description which satisfies prescribed criteria relating to the performance of, or the quality of leadership in, the school'', the rights of other interested bodies are not fully taken into account. If the amendment were incorporated into the Bill, there would be a small restriction on the Secretary of State's wide discretion to set out the prescribed criteria, which would be replaced by something a little more informed.

Under the clauses in chapter 2 on exemptions related to school performance, which the Minister would categorise as the earned autonomy measures, my hon. Friends and I shall be seeking a clearer idea of

how autonomy will be earned, how it will work, how the Secretary of State will arrive at the prescribed criteria and what they will be.

Let me now deal with amendment No. 9. Subsection (2) states:

''The criteria prescribed for the purposes of subsection (1) may include criteria referring to the opinion of the Secretary of State or the National Assembly for Wales.''

Sadly, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales is not here to enlighten the Committee about the exact procedure in the National Assembly and how it arrives at a corporate opinion in these matters.

Photo of Graham Brady Graham Brady Shadow Minister (Education)

I will happily give way, because I am sure that I shall learn something.

Photo of Hywel Francis Hywel Francis Labour, Aberavon

The consultation document entitled ''The Learning Country'' was widely discussed in Wales, and the Bill is the fruit of that exercise.

Photo of Graham Brady Graham Brady Shadow Minister (Education)

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman although I am not sure he has cleared up the confusion that may be felt by some Members from the English side of the border.

Given that we are dealing with primary legislation that creates new powers, a new procedure and new mechanism for earned autonomy, it is something that may relate not just to the current situation, following discussions and debates on ''The Learning Country'' but may carry on into the future, potentially without any limitation. In that case, at the appropriate time, when a school might be hoping that its success is taking it through the hoops of earned autonomy, it will need to know what those hoops will be. In the context of schools in Wales, the opinion of the National Assembly may, presumably, change from time to time as indeed may the opinion or the person of the Secretary of State for Education and Skills in England

As currently drafted, the Bill, particularly clause 5(2), contains a remarkably wide power. It enshrines in legislation the importance of something that is merely opinion. It is not required in the terms of the Bill to be informed opinion, but is merely a power to include criteria that refer to the opinion of the Secretary of State or the National Assembly for Wales.

Given that the criteria may include reference to the opinion of the Secretary of State, I think it is axiomatic that the criteria may include things that do not refer to the opinion of the Secretary of State. The decision will not, therefore, simply be made on the premise of what the Secretary of State happens to think is the right way to proceed; there will be other criteria.

Those other criteria may be entirely logical, practical and consistent. They may specify, for example, the outcome of a school's inspection, the opinion of the chief inspector or the opinion of the LEA. They may specify a certain level of improvement at the school whether it be progress through value-added league tables, dealing more effectively with

special educational needs or in improving the education of children for whom English is not the first language.

All those things might be described as the rational criteria that may be set out under the terms of this Bill, and which any school may look at to assess its chances for increased autonomy. It may feel that it has a right to increased autonomy because—in the words used by Ministers—it has earned autonomy.

We come back, however, to the appalling subsection (2), which, as well as sensible, rational, properly measured and transparent criteria, allows criteria that relate to the opinion of the Secretary of State. That should concern hon. Members on both sides of the Committee, as it concerns those working in schools. One refrain that is heard increasingly from teachers and heads is that they want more control over what goes on in their school and how they educate their pupils. They want to be able to earn autonomy. Indeed some of them believe that they are already earning rather more autonomy than they are allowed as they are not granted that much anyway. They believe that the LEA and the Department for Education and Skills between them manage to interfere and pile on bureaucracy at every turn.

Here we have a way that Ministers could set out objective, transparent criteria with no reference to the opinion of the Secretary of State or indeed of the National Assembly for Wales. Instead they could set out a way in which a school, a head or a governing body, would know what had to be done to qualify. If a school's goal was to have more autonomy so that it could engage in more innovative practices, reduce levels of bureaucracy and perhaps tackle some of the problems of teacher workload, it could see where it had to get to achieve that. Instead, the Bill contains the most opaque terms possible.

There is not even a requirement on the Secretary of State to have formed an opinion on the basis of a rational process of consultation and discussion. The Secretary of State's opinion can rank as a criterion along with everything else. It does not matter if the school has met all the challenges that any rational person would want to see it meet. It could be a school that has improved dramatically over a period of years. It could be achieving the best exam results in its neighbourhood. It could be a school that was highly prized by the local community. Yet the wild card is thrown into the game: is it the Secretary of State of the opinion that that school has earned autonomy?

In these two amendments I am seeking to begin to set out the process whereby earned autonomy can be really that. Instead of it being autonomy on the whim of the Secretary of State, we can have a new approach to the regulation and control of our schools under which they know what the criteria are for earning autonomy. This is an entirely constructive pair of amendments and I hope that the Minister will accept that they would contribute something important to the Bill.

Photo of Phil Willis Phil Willis Shadow Spokesperson (Education)

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. These are important amendments. I will try to fill the two minutes that we have left, as I get on the elephant and push it uphill. I have a problem with the second part of amendment No. 67, which says:

''with such organisations or bodies as he considers appropriate''.

Unless one specifies those bodies, the Secretary of State could say that she would not involve the teacher unions about pay and conditions for teaching staff. The Conservative Government bypassed the teacher unions with the schoolteachers' pay review body, which took away negotiating rights from the teacher unions. That might be the case with that part of the amendment.

The hon. Gentleman raised a crucial issue. The Minister has been growing impatient with us. We have been waiting until we got to this clause for him to tell us how the Secretary of State will outline the criteria for earned autonomy. Every school in the land that is following the debate with avid interest wants to know what earned autonomy means. One of the most insulting things that the Government have done is to tell the vast majority of our heads, governors and schools, after all that they have done to improve standards and to work hard to meet the Government's initiatives over the past four years—

Sitting suspended.

[Continued in column 77]