tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post9150791644755609686..comments2024-03-20T00:30:11.702-07:00Comments on Home Education Heretic: The Children, Schools and Families BillSimon Webbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10865289865412656573noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-2027916234621855172010-01-13T08:01:58.442-08:002010-01-13T08:01:58.442-08:00Do you mean the Parliament Act 1949? If so, I'...Do you mean the Parliament Act 1949? If so, I'm not sure they have time to use this before the election.<br /><br />The Parliament Act 1911 specifies that, "If a public bill (other than a money bill or a bill<br />extending the maximum duration of a parliament) was passed by the Commons in three<br />successive sessions, with at least two years between the first Commons second reading and<br />the Commons third reading in the third session, it could be presented for Royal Assent by the<br />Commons.<br /><br />The Parliament Act 1949 amended the 1911 Act reducing the time periods specified in the<br />execution of the procedure: replacing references to “three sessions” with “two sessions”, and to<br />“two years” with “one year”.<br /><br />As far as I can see they have only used this provision 7 times, unless there have been more recent developments?<br /><br />http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-00675.pdfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-6130401098453886472010-01-12T23:15:09.657-08:002010-01-12T23:15:09.657-08:00Alison said,
'there is a guillotine on the c...Alison said,<br /><br /> 'there is a guillotine on the committee stage but they cannot impose one in the Lords to my understanding.'<br /><br />No, but they can use the Parliament Act and have done so quite willingly in the past.<br /><br />Mrs AnonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-14914246472983201962010-01-12T12:53:37.815-08:002010-01-12T12:53:37.815-08:00Ciaran - the Lib Dems proposal allowed more debate...Ciaran - the Lib Dems proposal allowed more debate<br />Julie - there is a guillotine on the committee stage but they cannot impose one in the Lords to my understanding.Alison Sauernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-35062613622970638632010-01-12T12:47:48.411-08:002010-01-12T12:47:48.411-08:00Let me see......oh yes several people spent many m...Let me see......oh yes several people spent many many hours briefing conservative and lib dems, the result of which helped the decision made to whip both parties' MPs to vote against the bill, which they did yesterday. Labour were whipped to support it, so they did. <br /><br />The MPs who spoke were remarkably knowledgable. It was a joy to hear.<br /><br />We always expected it would pass second reading, we were very pleased to see by how little it passed.<br /><br />The committee stage has been truncated by a government hell bent on putting this bill through without due process. Therefore the opportunity for ammendments, which is actually in reality the Bill Committee stage, is reduced. However the ammendments are already written. There are two major sets I am familiar with.<br /><br />Then we have the report and third reading and then the Lords have to pass it through the same stages......we already have some lords (some very, very influential) of all parties on our side.<br /><br />The Lords can delay this bill beyond the election and therefore kill it.<br /><br />Oh, and for your information - I understand the CSF bill will not get through wash up, front bench opposition is too opposed and a Labour MP I spoke to before Christmas said there are more important bills for the government to look at for wash up.<br /><br />I think you may have to sack your fortune teller yet Simon.Alison Sauernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-10875214665544784162010-01-12T08:43:39.343-08:002010-01-12T08:43:39.343-08:00Well CiaranG, in my world too nearly all those who...Well CiaranG, in my world too nearly all those who spoke opposed the bill. Since it is a Government bill, there is little point in anybody but Ed Balls saying much about it. With the majoity which this administration enjoys, they can get anything through the house. All that the opposition can do is make brave speeches. As I say, it will probably be rushed thorugh on the nod during wash up week. I doubt any amendments will get in, but we shall see.Simon Webbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10865289865412656573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-70660281891605830472010-01-12T08:40:16.311-08:002010-01-12T08:40:16.311-08:00It went as I expected- some MPs (even perhaps many...It went as I expected- some MPs (even perhaps many) did rally to the HE side, but we are in that stage of the game in politics where the opposition will oppose anything on principle. With a big Labour majority it will go through especially with a guillotine. It may get twiddled with, but I can't see registration and monitoring failing unless Brown calls a snap election....Julienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-89243693330921840012010-01-12T08:17:10.588-08:002010-01-12T08:17:10.588-08:00Sometimes, Simon, I wonder if you live on another ...Sometimes, Simon, I wonder if you live on another planet. Today is one of those days. On my planet, there was a different second reading where virtually every MP who spoke (regardless of party, and of course discounting the two DCSF ministers) raised serious concerns about the home-ed provisions in the bill. Indeed, for what is (to the most people) a small and insignificant part of the overall bill, that issue took up a hugely disproportionate amount of the debate.<br /><br />For the first couple of hours of the debate, the house was busy. Later there were less members present. This is normal. I suspect it coincides with happy hour at the already subsidised bar.<br /><br />Whether you're right or not about the bill itself passing before this appalling government finally get thrown out, I strongly suspect Schedule 1 will be significantly amended, largely due to people who have been campaigning for this. I assume they're not the same people as all the "theys" in your last paragraph who sound both unfamiliar and deluded, since "stopping the bill" has never been an option. (Although that fact didn't stop the Lib Dems from proposing a silly time-wasting amendment to do just that last night).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-21872227595672204832010-01-12T06:35:15.761-08:002010-01-12T06:35:15.761-08:00"The only hope that home educators have is to..."The only hope that home educators have is to be less reasonable and more unpredictable."<br /><br />I don't lol very often, but, lol.Hackney Hackettehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01347630584893406110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-4770727371698449122010-01-12T05:50:55.041-08:002010-01-12T05:50:55.041-08:00I have no doubt that this bill will be pushed thro...I have no doubt that this bill will be pushed through there are no surprises here.<br /><br />Of course the chamber was largely empty - that's nothing new in the commons.<br /><br />As for a "No Surrender" policy, that's been the government's position and I've seen that from discussions with my own (loyal Labour) MP who believes there is no room for manoeuvre as the legislation already has a "light touch". <br /><br />I know from personal experience that hardened politicians regard reasonable people as a pushover and laugh at them behind their backs. The statistical argument had to be made but there was never any hope of winning the argument on those grounds. University debating societies - where many MPs cut their teeth - always teach their members to make up numbers and use them so long as they are vaguely plausible. They aren't "numbers" people and don't really care about other people's opinions, whether they are right or not.<br /><br />The only hope that home educators have is to be less reasonable and more unpredictable. Scream "child abuse" at their Labour MPs in a very public way; hammer them on the failure of the school system if you hope to win over the wider public. Give them a face-saving way out if you like - tell MPs that DCSF are misleading them.<br />Point out that it was Balls legislation that resulted in OFSTED snooping on two decent honest policewomen in order to stop their mutual childcare arrangement.<br /><br />Otherwise, and particularly if your MP continues to support the bill, ensure that they suffer as much damage as possible. You may fail but at election time revenge can be sweet - if short lived.<br /><br />Just don't rely on anything better from anyone else though; we're talking about democracy here, with lots of keen but otherwise useless and incompetent people that want to run your life.<br /><br />Thatcher's crowd were no different to this lot.<br />Power corrupts etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-16059875533819670132010-01-12T04:07:44.306-08:002010-01-12T04:07:44.306-08:00"The whips will be out and they will do as th..."The whips will be out and they will do as they are told!"<br /><br />Yes, but what will they be told to do? A good deal of government legislation falls by the wayside or is amended beyond recognition before it sees the light of day. Obviously a government with an overall majority stands a good chance of getting legislation through, but there's not going to be much point in that if it's unworkable and is going to end up in the government getting egg on its face. It looks to me as if Labour are playing for votes, but at the same time preparing for defeat: they wouldn't want to have to deal with the aftermath of some of the proposals such as the home school agreements. Or perhaps they don't know that they won't want to. Nothing would surprise me.suzygnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-71547077854028223332010-01-12T03:51:56.508-08:002010-01-12T03:51:56.508-08:00All the proposals in the bill are very vague and w...All the proposals in the bill are very vague and will need to be firmed up by Statutory Instruments in the future. The two things that were left out of the bill, entry to homes without warrant and right to interview children alone, were non starters anyway from a legal viewpoint. <br />The standard home educating position has been and still is, "Leave us alone, we don't weant any change in the law and jsut want things to continue in the same way". Since that is not going to happen, I think it would have been better to thrash out a framework for inspections and monitoring that both sides would be reasonably happy with. In the event, it is unilaterally decided. Do not be deceived by the 200 MPs voting against this bill. Their votes wil not in any case matter when the final decisions are made during wash up week. The whips will be out and they will do as they are told! In the meantime, they are courting anybody's vote they can. gestures of this sort play well to the gallery and they can at least claim to have done their best when the bill goes through at the end of April.Simon Webbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10865289865412656573noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-28218632890211568032010-01-12T01:53:55.425-08:002010-01-12T01:53:55.425-08:00Before I was interrupted by my own apparent inabil...Before I was interrupted by my own apparent inability to copy and paste my carefully crafted response, what I intended to point out was this.<br /><br /> Around 200 MPs voted against the Bill, which received a second reading by a relatively narrow majority, so it seems more were interested in opposing it than appeared from attendance in the chamber. <br /><br />Many of the MPs who swore to oppose the Bill actually spoke against it, some of them quite eloquently.<br /><br />Your perceptions of the expectations and strategies adopted by home-educating parents that you are either a bit out of touch, Simon, or that you are setting up a straw man. The proposals in Clause 26 are clearly designed as an attempt to work around the objections raised by home educators, and the whole Bill might look very different when it's finished with.suzygnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7881402584568285627.post-2627029543510599002010-01-12T01:17:53.176-08:002010-01-12T01:17:53.176-08:00Well I'm not sure what happened there! For th...Well I'm not sure what happened there! For the record, I have *not* just re-iterated what Simon said!suzygnoreply@blogger.com