Mr.Chaytor: I want to speak briefly to amendment No. 216. Itis an important amendment, the effect of which would be to remove fromthe Secretary of State the power to make regulations relating toparents’ powers to object to any aspect of the proposedadmissionarrangements. Theintroductory section 7 of the published skeletal code is entitled“Enforcing the code”. It makes the point that the localauthority, other local schools and the admission forum have importantpowers to refer any school to the adjudicator when it fails to complywith the mandatory provisions. That is true, but the section does notrefer to the powers of parents to refer individual schools’practices to the adjudicator. Parents do have powers, but they are severely prescribed by the Secretary ofState’s powers to make regulations as to the issues on whichparents can refer problems tothe adjudicator. There are several anomalies:for example, under the existing regulations laid down by the Secretaryof State, parents cannot refer the question of 10 per cent. selectionby aptitude to the adjudicator. However, they can refer to theadjudicator the case of a school that deliberately takes fewer pupilsthan the proposed admissions limit. To all intents and purposes theeffect of this on parents in the immediate catchment area will be thesame, but because of the regulations that the Secretary of State haslaid to prescribe these powers to parents, only one problem could bereferred by a group of parents. It is an argument that weadvanced on earlier clauses. If we are serious about giving parents agreater voice in the development of our education system andencouraging them to challenge more frequently and more assertively thepractices of individual schools that are designed to prevent fairaccess, it seems only logical that parents should have exactly the samepowers to refer issues to the adjudicator as are now held by individualadmissions authorities, local authorities and the admissionforum. 9.45pm SarahTeather: The Liberal Democrats are very sympathetic to thepoints raised by the hon. Member for Bury, North and we look forward tothe Minister’sreply. JacquiSmith: To ensure a fair admissions system that gives everychild, whatever their background, an equal chance to succeed, it iscrucial that we have a robust and independent system for consideringobjections to admission arrangements and for ensuring that they arefair. That, of course, is what the clausecovers. Amendment No.92, which was moved by the hon. Member for South Holland and TheDeepings, would place conditions on the circumstances in whichobjections could be made to the schools adjudicator or the NationalAssembly for Wales. I agree with him, of course, that we should notwant frivolous or vexatious objections to be considered. There has beenno evidence of that happening since 1999 when the first objections weremade. The question whether an objection has merit should be for theschools adjudicator, who is best placed to consider all theinformation. We should not try to fetter the discretion of theadjudicator or the Assembly as the amendment proposes. It is also important that theschools adjudicator should have flexibility to make decisions based onlocal circumstances and the merits of individual cases. The amendmentwould substantially reduce flexibility and change the balance of thesystem to favour the interests of schools rather than families andchildren. For those reasons I opposeit. Amendment No. 216,which was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Bury, North, wouldremove the power to prescribe in regulations the type of objection that parentscould make to the adjudicator. I strongly agree with him that parentsmust be able to complain about admission arrangements that theyconsider unfair, but we consider that to avoid numerous unjustified,repeated and costly referrals, formal objections by parents should berestricted to the use of pre-existing partial selection or, as my hon.Friend outlined, cases in which the admission number for a particularage group is lower than the number indicated, as happens now. However,parents can ask their local authorities to object on other grounds toadmissions arrangements and in addition parents are, as we discussedearlier, represented on admission forums by parent governor representatives; those forums will be able toobject to arrangements in future. I hope that my hon.Friend will agree that, as has been ably demonstrated in today’sdebates, the process of admissions can, particularly for individualparents, be a quite worrying and tense time. I am sure that he wouldnot want any parent, instead of going through the existing process ofapplication and, if unsuccessful, appeal, to be in the position oftaking objections about a school’s admissions arrangements totheadjudicator. Debateadjourned.—[Mr.Shaw.] Adjournedaccordingly at twelve minutes to Ten o’clock, till Tuesday 9 Mayat half-past Teno’clock. | 
