Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether her Department has assessed the effectiveness of the academy trust governance framework in ensuring that community and family engagement is prioritised by academy trusts.
Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)
Academy trusts should have reserved places for parents, carers or other individuals with parental responsibility within their governance structure. Single academy trusts should have at least two such places on the trust board. Multi-academy trusts should have at least two such places on the board or on each local committee, where they are established. Trusts should hold elections to fill these places as appropriate.
The department has not issued guidance allowing for the removal of parents from trust governance arrangements where a school is underperforming. Trusts are expected to maintain the governance arrangements that are set out in their articles of association, funding agreement and the Academy Trust Handbook.
Expectations for high-quality governance are set out in the Trust Quality Descriptions, which identify effective engagement with parents, carers and local communities as a feature of high-quality trusts. These expectations will be renewed through new Trust Standards. In addition, the department has committed to publishing minimum expectations on parental engagement for schools, which trust boards will oversee.
As set out in the Schools White Paper, the government intends to consult on requiring academy trusts to have local governance structures covering all their schools, helping to ensure that trust boards hear directly from parents and school communities. We will also be introducing Ofsted inspection of trusts.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether her Department has issued guidance on the length of time parental representation can be excluded within academy trusts where a school is underperforming.
Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)
Academy trusts should have reserved places for parents, carers or other individuals with parental responsibility within their governance structure. Single academy trusts should have at least two such places on the trust board. Multi-academy trusts should have at least two such places on the board or on each local committee, where they are established. Trusts should hold elections to fill these places as appropriate.
The department has not issued guidance allowing for the removal of parents from trust governance arrangements where a school is underperforming. Trusts are expected to maintain the governance arrangements that are set out in their articles of association, funding agreement and the Academy Trust Handbook.
Expectations for high-quality governance are set out in the Trust Quality Descriptions, which identify effective engagement with parents, carers and local communities as a feature of high-quality trusts. These expectations will be renewed through new Trust Standards. In addition, the department has committed to publishing minimum expectations on parental engagement for schools, which trust boards will oversee.
As set out in the Schools White Paper, the government intends to consult on requiring academy trusts to have local governance structures covering all their schools, helping to ensure that trust boards hear directly from parents and school communities. We will also be introducing Ofsted inspection of trusts.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of parental representation and involvement in governance arrangements within academy trusts.
Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)
Academy trusts should have reserved places for parents, carers or other individuals with parental responsibility within their governance structure. Single academy trusts should have at least two such places on the trust board. Multi-academy trusts should have at least two such places on the board or on each local committee, where they are established. Trusts should hold elections to fill these places as appropriate.
The department has not issued guidance allowing for the removal of parents from trust governance arrangements where a school is underperforming. Trusts are expected to maintain the governance arrangements that are set out in their articles of association, funding agreement and the Academy Trust Handbook.
Expectations for high-quality governance are set out in the Trust Quality Descriptions, which identify effective engagement with parents, carers and local communities as a feature of high-quality trusts. These expectations will be renewed through new Trust Standards. In addition, the department has committed to publishing minimum expectations on parental engagement for schools, which trust boards will oversee.
As set out in the Schools White Paper, the government intends to consult on requiring academy trusts to have local governance structures covering all their schools, helping to ensure that trust boards hear directly from parents and school communities. We will also be introducing Ofsted inspection of trusts.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps the Government is taking to ensure that people who suffered significant harm as a result of interferon treatment through contaminated blood products are compensated under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds
The Government accepted the Inquiry’s recommendation to introduce a new, higher level of award for infected people who were treated with interferon. The new Level 2B infection severity band will provide more core compensation through the Financial Loss and Care awards for the full two years after treatment. This uplifted award will be available to anyone treated with interferon who would otherwise be receiving a Level 2 award. Following the public consultation on the infected blood compensation scheme, we will also ensure that people who received more than one round of interferon treatment will be properly compensated for each of these rounds.
The Technical Expert Group advised that where people do experience longer term impacts of interferon treatment, the scheme should compensate for the impact on a person’s life. That is why, if someone has experienced long-term impacts following interferon treatment that have affected their ability to work or their need for care, they may be eligible for additional compensation through the Special Category Mechanism Severe Health Condition award. This approach ensures that those with long term side effects receive additional financial support.
The Government has now laid the required legislation to enact these changes, and these are subject to Parliamentary approval.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what progress she has made on responding to the recommendations of the Law Commission's review of disabled children's social care.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
In line with the protocol agreed between the Lord Chancellor and the Law Commission, the department provided an initial response to these recommendations within six months of publication. This will be followed by a full response within 12 months, which will set out how government will address the issues raised by the Law Commission.
Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what steps he is taking to improve party wall agreements.
Answered by Samantha Dixon
Successive governments have taken the view that the Party Wall Act 1996 meets its purpose of providing a framework to prevent and resolve disputes between neighbours regarding party walls. No review of the Act has been undertaken, nor is one planned.