Appendix 3 S.I. 2003/1377: memorandum
from the Department for Education and Skills
School Governance (Procedures) (England) Regulations
2003 (S.I. 2003/1377)
1. The Committee considered the above instrument
and requested a memorandum on the following points:
Explain why regulation 2(1) does not revoke regulation
21 of the 1999 Regulations entirely, given that the provisions
to which regulation 21(1) refers are also revoked.
2. Regulation 2(1) comes into effect on 1st September,
with the rest of the instrument. At the time it was laid, Regulations
relating to new schools were being drafted and it was not clear
when those Regulations would be made or when they would come into
force. In fact, The New Schools (General) (England) Regulations
2003 (S.I. 2003/1558) were made on 12th June 2003 and will
come into effect on 10th July 2003. Regulation 3 of those Regulations
revokes regulation 21(1) of the 1999 Regulations with effect from
Explain the intended effect of regulation 6(3).
Should not "for a period extending beyond" read "until"?
3. The wording of regulation 6(3) substantially repeats
that of regulation 43(3) of the 1999 Regulations. The Department
submits that the phrase used has the same meaning and legal effect
as the word "until".
Regulation 12(3) states that the person who is
acting as chair for the purposes of the meeting has a casting
vote provided that such person is a governor. Under what circumstances
will a person other than a governor preside at a meeting of the
4. A number of people other than governors have the
right to attend meetings of the governing body (see regulation
23(1)), including the clerk and associate members. Circumstances
may arise in which one of those people may be requested to preside
for all or part of a meeting (for example during the election
of the chair, as regulation 29(9) of the 1999 Regulations specifically
provided). Such a person does not of course have the right to
vote on any question that falls to be decided in the meeting.
Regulation 12(3) makes it clear that such a person does not acquire
any voting rights at a meeting merely because he may have been
invited to preside over the meeting or part of it.
In paragraph 1(3) of the Schedule:
(a) why does sub-paragraph (a) require a person
who has a direct pecuniary interest to be treated as having an
(b) explain the reason for including the words
"or he was nominated or appointed to office by a person"
in sub-paragraph (c), given the terms of sub-paragraph (b).
5. With regard to point 4(a), the first line of sub-paragraph
(3) should include the words "a direct or" before "an
indirect". With regard to point 4(b), the Department accepts
that phrase "or he was nominated to office by a person"
in sub-paragraph (c) is otiose, given the terms of sub-paragraph
6. The error in both cases is regretted and will
be corrected at the first convenient opportunity.
27th June 2003