Grant Aided Schools: Grants (P.72/2011): Amendment: Comments of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 10 June 2011 regarding:

Decision Reference: MD-ESC-2011-0019

Decision Summary Title ):

Grant-Aided Schools: Grants (P.72/2011) – Amendment: Comments

Date of Decision Summary:

6th June 2011

Decision Summary Author:

Jeremy Harris,

Assistant Director – Policy and Planning

Decision Summary:

Public or Exempt?

Public

Type of Report:

Oral or Written?

Oral

Person Giving

Oral Report:

Jeremy Harris

Written Report

Title :

n/a

Date of Written Report:

n/a

Written Report Author:

n/a

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

n/a

Subject:

Grant-Aided Schools: Grants (P.72/2011) – Amendment

Decision(s):

To approve the attached comments on Deputy D.J de Sousa’s amendment to the report and proposition of Senator B.E. Shenton entitled ‘Grant-Aided Schools: Grants’ (P.72/2011).

Reason(s) for Decision:

As Minister for Education, Sport and Culture, the Minister wishes to make known his views on the amendment to P.72/2011 in advance of the States debate scheduled for 7th June 2011.

Resource Implications:

There are no significant additional resource implications arising from these comments.

Action required:

The Education, Sport and Culture Department is to request the Greffier of the States to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States in advance of the debate on P.72/2011.

Signature:

Position:

Minister for Education, Sport and Culture

Date Signed:

Date of Decision :

6th June 2011

Grant Aided Schools: Grants (P.72/2011): Amendment: Comments of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture

Grant Aided Schools: Grants (P.72/2011) – Amendment:

Comments of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture

Firstly, I would like to advise members that I cannot support Senator Shenton’s proposition as it is flawed, and I will be urging members to reject it. A more detailed comment on Senator Shenton’s proposition has already been published, and I will confine these comments to the amendment that has been brought by Deputy de Sousa. One of the main virtues of Deputy de Sousa’s amendment is that it does not seek to distinguish between the fee-paying and non-fee paying sectors.

I fully support the aim of this amendment and the sentiments expressed by Deputy De Sousa who has recognised the extremely valuable range of services provided by the non-fee paying sector. These operate on the principle of inclusion across the ability range, and make full provision for students with Special Needs. As Minister for Education, Sport and Culture, I have an obligation under the Education (Jersey) Law 1999 to ‘ensure that there is available to every child of compulsory school age a full time education appropriate to their age, ability and aptitude’.

Senator Shenton’s proposition, if adopted, would effectively increase the pressure on our States schools to deliver reductions in expenditure, whilst the fee-paying sector would be exempt from savings. This would only serve to heighten the division between the two sectors.

I believe that it is unfair to target one school group or sector in this way, and would place me in conflict with my duty to provide a good standard of education to all children of school age, and not just to those in the fee-paying sector.

Account also needs to be given to the context in which the current spending proposals have been advanced. The non-fee paying sector has been the subject of significant spending reductions over the last ten years, and over the coming years it will be required to make further savings of approximately 10%.

The fee-paying sector, in contrast, has not been asked to make major savings over the same period, and it is only fair that it should also be expected to play its part. Education, Sport and Culture is required to make £11.1 million in savings across its services, and I do not believe the fee-paying sector should be exempt from this process.

In recent months there has been a divisive debate about fee-paying and non-fee paying education, with ill-founded statements being made about examination results in our 11-16 schools, drawing from narrow measures of assessment that do not properly reflect the context in which our Island schools are operating.

Following further discussions with the Council of Ministers, an extended period of 5 years has been agreed for both the fee-paying and non-fee paying schools.

The States schools have over many years demonstrated their willingness to participate in expenditure reductions where appropriate. It is now time for the fee paying schools to play their part.

Deputy de Sousa’s amendment will provide a degree of fairness and equity to the debate. It is absolutely right that we take this opportunity to give a clear signal to our States schools that their contribution to the Island’s education is equally important as fee-paying schools and is valued by this Assembly.