Procedure for issuing and revising pupil and parent guarantees

I beg to move amendment 180, in clause 2, page 3, line 8, leave out subsection (2) and insert—

‘(2) The Secretary of State must consult with whatever persons he or she thinks appropriate about the draft, such persons normally to include the following—

(a) associations of local education authorities,

(b) local education authorities,

(c) bodies representing the interests of schools,

(d) bodies representing the interests of parents and pupils,

(e) bodies representing the interests of teachers, and must consider any representations made by them.’.

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:

Amendment 85, in clause 2, page 3, line 8, after ‘consult’, insert

‘the House of Commons Select Committee on Children, Schools and Families and’.

Amendment 126, in clause 2, page 3, line 25, after ‘may’, insert ‘only’.

Amendment 127, in clause 2, page 3, line 25, leave out ‘before’ and insert ‘after’.

It is a pleasure to have reached the end of clause 1. We have given it a reasonable amount of scrutiny. I hope that we will not need to take as much time on clause 2, as the amendments are not as complex or significant.

Amendment 180 would require the Secretary of State to consult others on the issuing and revising of pupil and parent guarantees. At the moment, the undertakings in the Bill are rather loose in relation to the Secretary of State’s responsibilities. Clause 2(2) states:

“The Secretary of State must consult whatever persons he or she thinks appropriate about the draft and must consider any representations made by them.”

We would like a little more clarity about who precisely is to be consulted. We do not want it be only special advisers, people from the Department or a few selected friends of the Secretary of State. We believe that, as a minimum, it should include local education authorities, associations of local education authorities, bodies representing the interests of schools, and bodies representing the interests of parents, pupils and teachers. In amendment 85, we go on to say that the Secretary of State should have the explicit responsibility of consulting the Select Committee on Children, Schools and Families—or whatever it is called whenever the legislation is passed. I hope that the Minister will say whether he is willing to include in the Bill more meaningful measures to ensure consultation.

Amendments 126 and 127, which go together, seek to ensure that consultation on the precise drafting of pupil and parent guarantees is undertaken after the Bill’s enactment—if, indeed, it passes into law. The pupil and parent guarantees are, in many cases, not well defined. It seems that the Government cobbled them together rather quickly. It would be a matter for concern if the existing draft pupil and parent guarantees were to be implemented. We would much rather that a proper process of consultation and consideration of the guarantees took place after enactment.

I hope that the Minister will address those two concerns in his response.

Amendment 180 lists bodies that should be consulted, but it is not necessary. I know that the hon. Gentleman would like a list, but clause 2(2) states:

“The Secretary of State must consult whatever persons he or she thinks appropriate about the draft and must consider any representations made by them.”

The list proposed by the hon. Gentleman includes exactly those people whom we would consult in any case. As I said, I do not think that a list is necessary, although I know that the obvious question will be, “Can you name one?” One problem with making a list is finding that someone has been missed. I do not see the need for the amendment. The other amendments would require us to invalidate the current consultation on pupil and parent guarantees.

On a cautionary note, I agree generally that we would expect the Secretary of State to consult widely and not to be confined to the names given in the amendment, but strange things happen. My hon. Friend may recall that a certain Secretary of State for Education fell out badly with one of the trade unions representing teachers’ interests, which one would think would have been consulted along with all the others. We must be wary so that on some future occasion, an equally stroppy Secretary of State for Education does not take it in mind not to consult on the basis of a falling out.

To be fair, my hon. Friend is right to caution us against what might happen. He is right to point out that it is important that a wide range of bodies are consulted. My intention—I will read it into the record—is that all the people and bodies listed in the amendment are exactly the sort that I would expect to be consulted on any pupil and parent guarantee, so I do not think that the amendment is necessary.

The hon. Gentleman thinks that there are drafting problems and issues with which people might disagree, including many of the bodies that he included on the list. That is the whole purpose of the consultation. It is a 12-week consultation that started in the middle of January. After 12 weeks, people will come back to us with their views on the guarantees to ensure that the consultation is meaningful rather than just being one consultation followed by another. The hon. Gentleman is right that we should consult with a wide range of bodies. Consultation improves Government policy. Our current consultation is a real one, so I do not see any need for his group of amendments. I hope that with those reassurances he will withdraw his amendments.

I am grateful to the Minister for his response. Perhaps I will get half or one third of a point for trying. Nevertheless, I will make the same point as the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, North-East, albeit in a different way. There is a great difference between one Government wanting to consult in a particular way and future Governments wanting to consult in the same way.

There is also a big difference between two phrases that the Minister used in relation to the consultation. At the start of his reply, he said that the Government will consult with the list of bodies; later, in response to the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, North-East, he said that he would expect the Government to consult with the bodies on the list. There can be a big difference between an expectation and what happens in reality. However, it has at least been put on record that the Minister accepts that those bodies—I assume that that includes the departmental Select Committee—should be consulted.

I regret that consultation on pupil and parent guarantees will not be re-opened after the Bill is enacted because the existing guarantees are very deficient and will be difficult to implement, but I accept that I have not changed the Minister’s mind.

The results of the consultation will be taken into account and I suspect that there will be changes to the document on the basis of the representations that we receive. The point of a consultation exercise is to listen to what people say and to improve the documentation.

I am grateful to the Minister for his clarification. Will he inform the Committee of the time scale for completion of the consultation, when we can expect to know the results and whether they will become available while we are scrutinising the Bill?

Consultation began on 11 January and will run for a standard 12-week period. It will conclude at the end of March. It is difficult to say precisely when the results of the consultation will be published, and what will happen.

I am grateful to the Minister, but his answer underlines the fact that we are debating an important part of a far-reaching Bill, yet do not understand what the guarantees will comprise. We shall probably  end up with the results of the consultation not even being supplied to Parliament before the general election. If Parliament is dissolved by the time the consultation has finished, presumably the results will not be announced until after the election. We are being expected to legislate on the basis of guarantees that we do not understand. That is regrettable and it broadens our worries about clause 1 and the parent and pupil guarantees. Having made tiny progress—slightly less than I had hoped for—I shall not press the amendment to a Division. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.