The only similarity between our policy on academies and the new policy on academies is that the Secretary of State has pinched the word ““academy”” and attached it to the new schools he wishes to establish. Our academies were set up in the most disadvantaged areas, not the most affluent areas. They were set up with the agreement of local authorities rather than to avoid any role for local authorities. They taught the core parts of the national curriculum, including sex and relationship education, rather than opting out entirely from the curriculum. They had an obligation not just on looked-after children, but to co-operate to stop competitive exclusions in an area, and that has been entirely removed by this Bill. There was a requirement for our academies to have a sponsor, and that has been removed. We had a requirement for proper consultation with the community, also removed. Our academies programme was about tackling disadvantage. The new policy is about encouraging elitism and enabling the affluent to do better. That is why it is so deeply unfair.
Academies Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Ed Balls
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 26 July 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Academies Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
514 c823-4 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 17:40:20 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_659863
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_659863
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_659863