I rise to speak to three amendments tabled in my name: Amendments 10, 95 and 120A. I am hopeful that the first two at least may improve the drafting of the Bill, though it could be that the Minister will in response say that what I think is set out in the Bill is not as I think it is.
A grouping of this size, which deals with many different, technical and difficult points, is not a way to legislate. I do not know how Members of the Committee can possibly follow a grouping of this scope and technicality. I hope that in future stages of the Bill the groupings will enable Peers who are not experts in education law—and even those who are—to follow more reasonably.
Amendment 10 seeks to insert in Clause 1(3) the phrase, ""(as may from time to time be amended by them)"."
This is an attempt to make clear that the academy agreement between the Secretary of State and the other party should be defined not only as the initial agreement but as an agreement which may be amended by them consensually from time to time. I hope that that is helpful, because without those words we might run into trouble.
Amendment 95 seeks to amend Clause 2(4), which entitles the Secretary of State to indemnify those running an academy if the agreement is terminated. The amendment simply adds the word "reasonable" before "expenditure" so that the indemnity would be in respect of reasonable expenditure. Paragraphs (a) and (b) then refer to what the indemnity may relate to. It is a prudent provision because without it lavish and unnecessary expenditure would be indemnified, and that cannot be right.
Amendment 120A seeks to amend Clause 4, which deals with academy orders. I have tabled the amendment for clarification because I do not understand what the words at the end of subsection (3)— ""or a school that replaces it"—"
mean, or are intended mean. Are they intended to cover new free schools? I do not think they are because the whole of Clause 4 is confined to existing secondary schools converting into academies.
Academies Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Phillips of Sudbury
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 June 2010.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Academies Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
719 c1325-6 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 17:32:49 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_648653
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_648653
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_648653