| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
4.15 am
In Committee, there was a detailed debate about the effects of the Greenwich judgment--[Interruption.]--perhaps of the sort that is not possible in the Chamber at this hour in the morning--[Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."] The amendment was designed to reflect the concern of Liberal Democrat Members--[Hon. Members: "Wake them up."] My hon. Friends certainly have those concerns, and we seek through the new clause another way of mitigating the worst effects of the judgment, without denying parental choice.
The new clause would require the Secretary of State to make regulations to enable local education authorities to charge other LEAs for pupils who come from elsewhere to be educated within their areas. At present, the Secretary of State has the power to do so under the Education Act 1996. It is our view that the standard spending assessment does not provide an adequate way of redressing the imbalance increasingly occurring between popular local education authorities and those with surplus places that are not doing as good a job.
The new clause represents a way in which we could begin to address that problem. I hope that the Government will give us a positive response, and that we shall be able to do something to stop the spoilt choice that parents and children in many LEAs now face.
Mr. Byers:
New clause 17 would effectively reintroduce mandatory inter-authority recoupment in relation to pupil numbers. That is not a road down which the Government would wish to go, so if it is pressed to a vote, I shall ask the House to vote against it. However, I hope that we can avoid that, because the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Mr. Burstow) has raised some important points about the consequences of the Greenwich judgment on payments for pupils in the home authority rather than the host authority where they may be attending school.
We believe that such matters are best dealt with through the standard spending assessment regime. The hon. Gentleman may be aware that we are conducting a
wholesale review of the system with the intention of introducing new measures for April 1999. I can assure him that the concerns that he has just raised will be taken into account as part of that exercise. In the light of those assurances, I hope that he will feel able to withdraw new clause 17 and allow his concerns to be addressed as part of the review of the standard spending assessment regime.
Mr. Burstow:
I have listened carefully to the Minister, and I am grateful that he listened carefully to my remarks about the way in which the Greenwich judgment affects my authority and many others. It is not the effect on the LEA that concerns me and my colleagues--it is the effect on parents and children who find themselves unable to get a school place. However, having listened to the Minister's generous offer in respect of SSA methodology--which provides a way forward to address the funding issues--I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.
Mr. Willis:
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
I shall be equally brief. [Hon. Members: "Hear, hear."] This bear pit is what it must have been like for the Christians being fed to the lions.
The purpose of the new clause is straightforward, and we hope that the Government will support it. In Committee, we discussed the relationship between LEAs and schools. It took a great deal of hard work to get from the Government an agreement that there would be a published code of practice. We welcomed that, and we welcomed also the fact that there will be a clear set of criteria covering the relationship between an LEA and an individual school. What worries us is that the Bill proposes to give the Secretary of State the power to change the code of practice without any review. The purpose of the new clause is to say that, if the Secretary of State wishes to change the code of practice, a resolution from both Houses will be needed.
Mrs. Browning:
We have touched on this issue in Committee and on Report and, yet again, I seek an
Mr. Byers:
I am more than pleased to give an assurance to the hon. Members for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning) and for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) that there will be the fullest possible consultation about the LEA code of practice. It will be one of the most important codes to come out of the Bill. It will define the relationship within the new framework between LEAs and individual schools. There is some uncertainty between those partners, and it is only right and proper that the code of practice clarifies the respective responsibilities.
I do not feel that it is appropriate to deal with the matters in the way outlined by the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough. It may be that the regulations need to be changed on a regular basis, to reflect the different responses and needs of the partners within the new framework, and we need flexibility. If changes are proposed, the new draft document will be fully consulted upon, with the intention of getting it absolutely right. If, after that consultation--during the practical implementation of the system--the view is that changes are needed, once again there will be the fullest possible consultation. I hope that, in the light of that assurance, the hon. Gentleman will feel able to withdraw the motion.
Mr. Willis:
I am grateful to the Minister for those assurances, which were the sort of assurances that we required. On that basis, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.
Motion and clause, by leave, withdrawn.
Mr. Don Foster:
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 23--Abolition of corporal punishment in schools etc.--
Amendment No. 144, in clause 114, page 83, line 31, leave out from beginning to end of line 41.
'--(1) Where the Secretary of State proposes to issue or revise a code of practice under section 117, he shall prepare a draft of the code (or revised code).
(2) The Secretary of State shall consult such persons about the draft as he thinks fit and shall consider any representations made by them.
(3) If he determines to proceed with the draft (either in its original form or with such modifications as he thinks fit) he shall lay a copy of the draft before each House of Parliament.
(4) If, within the 40-day period, either House resolves not to approve the draft, the Secretary of State shall take no further steps in relation to the proposed code.
(5) If no such resolution is made within the 40-day period, the Secretary of State shall issue the code (or revised code) in the form of the draft, and it shall come into force on such date as the Secretary of State may by order appoint.
(6) If a draft of a proposed code of practice is not approved under subsection (4), the Secretary of State may lay a new draft of a proposed code before both Houses of Parliament.'.--[Mr. Willis.]
Brought up, and read the First time.
'(1) The Education Act 1996 shall be amended as follows.
(2) In section 548 (no right to give corporal punishment)
(a) omit subsections (2), (4) and (5).
(b) in subsection (3), after paragraph (a) there shall be inserted--
(aa) any pupil for whom nursery education (within the meaning of Part V of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998) is provided.
(c) in subsection (3), omit subparagraphs (i) and (ii) of paragraph (b), and paragraph (d).
(3) In section 549 (interpretation of section 548), omit subsection (3).'.--[Mr. Don Foster.]
Brought up, and read the First time.
'.--(1) For section 548 of the Education Act 1996 there shall be substituted--
"No right to give corporal punishment
548.--(1) Corporal punishment given by, or on the authority of, a member of staff to a child--
(a) for whom education is provided, at any school, or
(b) for whom education is provided, otherwise than at school, under any arrangements made by a local education authority, or
(c) for whom specified nursery education is provided otherwise than at school,
cannot be justified in any proceedings on the ground that it was given in pursuance of a right exercisable by the member of staff by virtue of his position as such.
(2) Subsection (1) applies to corporal punishment so given to a child at any time, whether at the school or other place at which education is provided for the child, or elsewhere.
(3) The following provisions have effect for the purposes of this section.
(4) Any reference to giving corporal punishment to a child is to doing anything for the purpose of punishing that child (whether or not there are other reasons for doing it) which, apart from any justification, would constitute battery.
(5) However, corporal punishment shall not be taken to be given to a child by virtue of anything done for reasons that include averting--
(a) an immediate danger of personal injury to, or
(b) an immediate danger to the property of,
any person (including the child himself).
(6) "Member of staff", in relation to the child concerned, means--
(a) any person who works as a teacher at the school or other place at which education is provided for the child, or
(b) any other person who (whether in connection with the provision of education for the child or otherwise)--
(i) works at that school or place, or
(ii) otherwise provides his services there (whether or not for payment),
and has lawful control or charge of the child.
(7) "Child" (except in subsection (8)) means a person under the age of 18.
(8) "Specified nursery education" means full-time or part-time education suitable for children who have not attained compulsory school age which is provided--
(a) by a local education authority; or
(b) by any other person--
(i) who is (or is to be) in receipt of financial assistance given by such an authority and whose provision of nursery education is taken into account by the authority in formulating proposals for the purposes of section 110(2)(a) of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, or
(ii) who is (or is to be) in receipt of grants under section 1 of the Nursery Education and Grant-Maintained Schools Act 1996; or
(c) (otherwise than as mentioned in paragraph (a) or (b)) in any educational institution which would fall within section 4(1) above (definition of "school") but for the fact that it provides part-time, rather than full-time, primary education."
(2) The following provisions of the Education Act 1996, namely--
(a) section 549 (interpretation of section 548), and
(b) section 550 (no avoidance of section 548 by refusing admission to school etc.), shall cease to have effect.'.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |