Schools bill’s passage through Parliament now seems on verge of farcical –as next Lords stage looms despite mystery over its key provisions

The government seems likely to face yet more controversy over the passage of its schools bill through Parliament, with ministers having rejected cross-party calls by members of the House of Lords to pause the much-amended draft legislation until the autumn.

Yesterday the Department for Education bowed to almost universal criticism within the Lords about how it has proposed to reform the academies system, by withdrawing the first 18 clauses of the bill, all of which relate to the academies system.

The DfE is pledging to “bring forward revised proposals” in relation to these clauses, which sought to standardise and extend the system through which ministers can intervene in academy trusts, when the bill reaches the House of Commons.

But with that not scheduled to happen until the autumn, the bill now appears to face the perhaps farcical situation of completing its passage through the Lords this month with many of its central provisions now unknown.

Last month, the bill had gone through the third, and most detailed, phase of five stages of its passage through the Lords, before heading to the Commons in the autumn.

During its five days at committee stage, it had faced sustained criticism, with the former education secretary Lord Baker joining two recent academies ministers, Lords Nash and Agnew – all Conservative - in tabling amendments which would have scrapped 16 of the first 18 clauses in the bill.

The government has now accepted that its passage through the Lords without such sweeping changes would have been impossible, with Labour, Liberal Democrat, crossbench and Green peers also in opposition.

But its decision yesterday, and the current Parliamentary timetable, still puts it at odds with at least two of the above Conservative peers, and others in the Lords, in terms of what happens next.

The bill is now due to head to the next stage in the Lords, report stage, on July 12^th, with a further sitting on July 18^th,, , and with a final stage, 3^rd reading, then scheduled before it reaches the Commons.  

On day one of the Lords committee stage of the bill, on June 8^th, a succession of speakers called on ministers to listen to the criticism and pause the legislation. But the repeated call was for them to return with an amended bill not for when it reaches the Commons, but before it makes any further progress in the Lords.

Lord Knight, the former Labour schools minister, had said: “I suggest politely to the Minister and to the department that they listen to the debate that we have had and, in particular, listen to the noble Lords, Lord Nash, Lord Baker and Lord Agnew…their amendments make it look as though they are saying, ‘Just scrap it all and start again.’ My first choice would be for the Government to listen to this effective pre-legislative scrutiny – it is the closest thing we have to it – say ‘maybe we’ve got this kind of wrong’, take the summer, think about it and come back in the autumn on Report [in the Lords] with a whole new set of clauses to achieve what the Government are trying to achieve.”

Lord Baker had agreed, saying: “It might be a good idea to put off Report until the autumn so that [the government] can reflect and focus on what is really needed to help failing schools.”

Lord Nash had backed this, calling on Baroness Barran, the current academies minister who has been piloting the legislation through the Lords, to pause its passage in this way.

He suggested the minister could “consider discussions with Ministers on the wisdom of…putting off Report until the autumn”.

Two other peers, the Bishop of Durham and the cross-bench peer Baroness Meacher, had also backed the delay before the next stage of the Lords.

But with the bill’s progress through the Lords, instead, set to continue and finish this month, before heading to the Commons where details on its key academisation clauses will now emerge afresh, the following strange scenario seems in prospect in just over 10 days’ time.

That is, the bill will face two days at report stage, followed by the third reading, with the Lords not able to debate its central clauses on academisation, because the current ones will be being withdrawn, but with no replacements being put in their place until the draft legislation reaches the Commons.

It is possible therefore to imagine some scathing responses from peers – though ministers’ bowing to the criticism will no doubt be welcomed – at report stage in 11 days’ time.

Indeed, one experienced observer of the passage of education legislation through Parliament wondered if there might even be an attempt to stop the bill passing, at the end of third reading.

Despite all of this, there was no suggestion from the DfE that other clauses of the bill which have attracted controversy – particularly around pupil attendance and a register for home educated children – are being amended.

That will be seen by critics as controversial in itself. It does mean, though, that they are still likely to be debated within the Lords.