Plans to introduce a home education register are “intrusive”, “bureaucratic” and should be dropped, Peers have told the Government.
During a wide-ranging debate on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill in the House of Lords, Peers questioned the need for a register, said it risked encroaching on normal family life, and raised concerns about its compatibility with human rights legislation.
Under the Bill, parents must provide not only their names and addresses, but the amount of time each child spends “receiving education from each parent” – and provide the same information for anyone else who educates the child, updating it within 15 days of any change.
‘Huge changes’
Lord Frost warned that “there is much more to this register than the word suggests. Those educating at home will have to provide a vast amount of very detailed data about their children, set out in great depth in the Bill”.
Furthermore, he added, it “also requires data on ‘education providers’ — which is very widely defined as anybody who provides any sort of teaching to children — to be submitted to the local authority”.
There is a risk it will be regulated to death. If that happens, it will be parents and children who are the losers.Lord Frost
He concluded: “I hope the Government will consider whether it really is necessary to bring in these huge changes. There is a risk it will be regulated to death. If that happens, it will be parents and children who are the losers.”
‘State surveillance’
Lord Jackson of Peterborough said he could see no “possible justification” for “all the detail demanded in this Bill”.
He explained: “Consider the sheer intrusiveness of the data demanded. It compels parents to report the number of hours each of them spends educating, but parents educate their children constantly — when cooking a meal together, opening a bank account, or simply talking and living life together.”
state-mandated surveillance of family life on an unprecedented scale for law-abiding citizens choosing a perfectly legal form of educationLord Jackson
Lord Jackson asserted that requiring such detail, and much more besides, “constitutes state-mandated surveillance of family life on an unprecedented scale for law-abiding citizens choosing a perfectly legal form of education”.
Referring to a recently published legal opinion on the Bill by Aidan O’Neill KC, he highlighted “significant questions over the scheme’s compatibility” with the European Convention on Human Rights and data protection regulations.
Reassurance
Other Peers to raise concerns about the requirement for a home school register included Baroness Meyer, Lord Browne of Belmont, Baroness Fox of Buckley and Lord Wei.
Following the debate, Education Minister Baroness Smith of Malvern responded: “In Committee, we will be able to look in more detail at the provisions around what information needs to be provided by home-educators, and I hope that we can reassure people on that.”
Committee stage, at which the House of Lords will consider amendments to the Bill, is scheduled to begin on 20 May.
See our briefing on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill for further information.
Scathing critique
Mr O’Neill, a top human rights law expert commissioned by The Christian Institute to review the Bill, found “no evidence to suggest that all home schooled children and their families require to be a particular focus of concern by the State”.
Rather, he argued, “the measure at issue may not constitute a proportionate interference in the fundamental rights of the families and children involved, and hence be Convention incompatible”.
Institute Deputy Director Simon Calvert commented: “Parents who home educate do so for a wide variety of reasons, including inadequate SEND provision, bullying at school, or philosophical beliefs. Rather than treating them like criminals, the Government should be finding more ways to support them.”
Govt pushes for forced registration of home-schooling families in England
