This page should be read with https://edyourself.org/changing-a-bill/ which explains how amendments work. Briefly, the more amendments to a clause, the longer it takes the House of Lords to discuss it, thereby sending a message to government about which parts of the bill are causing most interest and concern.
Members of the House of Lords have tabled several hundred amendments to the Children Not In School clauses [30-35] of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill for debate from July 3rd.
Amendments to Children Not In School have been tabled by the following peers: Baroness Barran [C]; Lord Lucas [C]; L Frost [C]; L Young [C]; L Russell of Liverpool [XB]; L Watson [L]; L Storey [LD]; Bns Fox [NA]; L Wei [C]; Lord Crisp [XB]; Bns Jones [G]; L Hacking [L]; L Meston [XB]; Bns Benjamin [LD]; L Parkinson [C]; Bns Whitaker [L]; L Nash [C]; L Agnew [C]; L Bourne [C]; Bns Bakewell [LD]; Bns Garden [LD]; L Moynihan [C]
C= Conservative; L = Labour; LD = Liberal Democrat; XB = Crossbench; NA = Non-affiliated; G = Green
Latest Version Of Amendments
Amendment lists can be found here https://www.parallelparliament.co.uk/bills/2024-26/childrenswellbeingandschools with further explanation on this page https://edyourself.org/childrens-wellbeing-bill-how-to-track/#marsh
At the time of writing on July 4th, the most up to date version of amendments is the 8th marshalled list, dated July 1st.
Debate July 3rd
Clause 30 Consent Withdrawal School
Clause 30 of the bill from page 50 line 27 to page 53 line 24 says consent for withdrawal from school will be required if the child is attending a special school [Condition A] or for a child subject to child protection enquiries or where child protection action has been taken [Condition B] The local authority will determine whether home or school is in the child’s “best interests“.
Lords amendments to clause 30 focus on:
- not being allowed to leave special school – local authority deciding “best interests”
- having to stay at school if child protection enquiry (not just CP Plan)
- no independent appeal against local authority (eg tribunal)
- 6 month wait to re-apply if refused
- There is also an objection to the entire clause 30 (scroll down to #understandmarsh for more)
Local authorities deciding“best interests” is proving highly controversial. There are amendments to leave it out entirely, or probing what it actually means and who gets to decide, and whether there should be consideration of the reality and practicality when an individual child is forced to remain in school, not just some abstract notion of “best interests.” There are also recommendations that the local authority must provide a written statement of reasons for refusal.
The majority of amendments seek to restrict new powers but there are always a few exceptions; hence for clause 30 there is amendment 207 which proposes to add children in need, also adding historical child protection concerns. The amendments won’t be adopted by government but they will provide an opportunity to raise tragic safeguarding cases such as Sara Sharif.
Amendments dealing with operational issues and fairness include highlighting the fact that the bill doesn’t give a deadline for local authorities to decide consent, and allows penalties for non-attendance while a decision is awaited on deregistration. There are also amendments about not notifying the other parent if it could be a safeguarding issue
For Debate After July 3rd
Clause 31 Compulsory Registration
Because of the number of amendments to clause 30, the House of Lords will not get to detailed scrutiny of clause 31 on July 3rd. At present the government has not announced any more committee dates before recess, so detailed scrutiny of clause 31 and beyond will have to be picked up in September.
Clause 31 of the bill from page 53 line 25 to page 64 line 23 proposes compulsory registration of children not in school, which in practice means mostly children who are home educated, although the government is always keen to stress that it is not a home education register as such.
Clause 31 describes circumstances requiring children to be registered plus all the information to be included, supplied by parents and by education providers. Clause 31 also sets out fines for providers who fail to supply information. (Sanctions for parents not complying are set out in clause 32 School Attendance Orders)
Lords amendments to clause 31 focus on challenging:
- inclusion of absent or non-resident parent throughout the register – safeguarding risk
- amount of information required from parents (linked with penalties in clause 32)
- how often and how quickly parents have to report information (linked with penalties in clause 32)
- extra information for register if local authorities can obtain it (parents pressured)
- the amount of information required from providers (alternatively opt to close down)
- how often and how quickly providers have to report information (alternatively opt to close down)
- lack of detail on face of bill about scope re providers eg above x hours per week, only school hours
- individuals being subject to provider duties
- how information is used and kept safe
Going the opposite way, amendment 279 proposes giving more powers to local authorities and increasing the burden on families. This won’t be adopted by government but could be used in debate to make government measures appear “light touch” in comparison, or to try and get ministerial assurances about subsequent statutory guidance.
Clause 31 also has a few small things to say about support for children not in school, hence there are amendments about improving support, making it what families actually want such as exam centres, also parents not penalised if they ask for help. There is also an objection to the entire clause (scroll down to #understandmarsh for more information)
Clause 32 New School Attendance Orders
Clause 32 of the bill from page 64 line 24 to page 78 line 6 sets out additional uses for the school attendance order [SAO] process (not just unsuitable education) plus much harsher penalties for failure to comply.
Lords amendments to clause 32 reveal strong disagreement with:
- new use of school attendance order (eg Condition B if child protection enquiry or action)
- allowing local authorities to start SAO process if parents fail to provide or update for the register
(Conditions C and D) combined with vastly increased penalties - local authorities able to start SAO process for minor registration errors
- local authority power to decide child’s best interests when serving order, especially if parents can’t appeal
- SAO process starting too quickly
- when SAO may not be appropriate eg if school anxiety or special needs
- local authority considering all settings and providers during SAO process (intrusive and unworkable, providers opting instead to close down)
- local authority equating refusal of home visit with unsuitable education
- government not considering how child might react to inspector in home
- local authority not having to justify decision to pursue order
- no independent route for parents to appeal or challenge the order
- vastly increased penalties for not registering child at school if served with order (combined with more extensive use of orders)
Current School Attendance Orders
For comparison, read about current school attendance order legislation here https://edyourself.org/school-attendance-orders/
Clauses 33-35
33 Children not in school: processing of information
34 New Statutory Guidance children not in school and school attendance orders
35 Consequential Amendments
Understanding Marshalled List
Amendments to each clause of the bill are grouped together in sequence line by line from beginning to end of each clause, with the name of the responsible peer(s) above the amendment. Onscreen view for checking page and line references (no need to download huge PDF) clauses 30-35 here https://shorturl.at/eJleP
As well as tabling line by line amendments, some peers may also add “notice of intention to oppose the Question that Clause X stand part of the Bill” . This allows a more general discussion of the clause as a whole, as well as indicating disagreement, and tends to be added by peers who are not the same political party as the government.
The last set of amendments to a clause come in the form of “After Clause X” which, as with the “stand part” amendments, serve to open up the debate and again tends to be peers from the main opposition party or other parties or cross-benchers.
Read more here https://edyourself.org/childrens-wellbeing-bill-how-to-track/#marsh