Children and Families Bill

Lord Lexden Excerpts

Monday 4th November 2013 Grand Committee

Moved by

[Lord Lexden]

153: Clause 38, page 31, line 1, leave out paragraph (f) and insert—
“(f) an independent school”

[Lord Lexden (Con)]

My Lords, in moving Amendment 153 I shall speak also to Amendments 157 and 159. In doing so, I declare my interest as president of the Independent Schools Association, a body representing the heads of some 300 smaller and less well known independent schools that form part of the Independent Schools Council, of which I was once the general secretary. The amendments are short and straightforward, and I do not need to detain the Committee long in outlining them.

The purpose of Amendment 153 is to remove all doubt and achieve absolute clarity on a crucial point that seems to be generally agreed in actual practice; namely, that parents and young people will be able to make representations for any independent school to be named in an EHC plan, not just those on the list approved by the Secretary of State under Clause 41. The Explanatory Notes to the Bill expressly state at paragraph 216 that:

“Parents and young people will … be able make representations for an independent school or post-16 independent specialist provider not included in this list as is the case under the current legislative framework”.

My noble friend Lord Nash, in a letter to Mr Barnaby Lenon, the current chairman of the Independent Schools Council, also stated:

“I can assure you that parents and young people will still be able to make representations for independent schools that are not on the list approved under clause 41 of the Bill, and the local authority will … need to consider those representations”.

Finally, I shall quote from the recently published draft SEN code of practice, to which much reference has been made in these debates:

“Parents and young people may also make representations for places in non-maintained early years provision or at independent schools or Independent Specialist Providers … that are not on the list mentioned in (f) above and the local authority must consider their request”.

All that seems clear enough; indeed, complete unanimity could hardly be more clearly expressed, and yet Clause 38(3)(f) provides that the right of parents and young people to make representations for an independent school can be exercised only in respect of,

“an institution approved by the Secretary of State under section 41 (independent special schools and special post-16 institutions: approval)”.

That list, of course, does not include all independent schools so the unanimity so clearly expressed in the Explanatory Notes, in my noble friend’s letter and in the draft SEN code of practice is not reflected in the Bill itself. That is the point.

--- Later in debate ---

I hope that my response reassures noble Lords on the points they have raised during the debate. I therefore urge the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.

[Lord Lexden]

My Lords, I thank all who have taken part in this brief debate, and particularly my noble friends Lady Perry and Lord Addington for making clear their strong support for the great work that is done in independent schools, particularly those of a specialist character dealing with special educational needs. I listened carefully to my noble friend’s reply, and I thank him for dealing with the points so fully. He will understand that in listening to him I did not extract complete assurance and total satisfaction. I shall read the comments in Hansard in full and consider what further action might be appropriate, as many other noble Lords will be doing. For the time being, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 153 withdrawn.