"The Chair of LGBTory - the Conservative Party's queer division [!!! Fagburn] - has slammed an article which suggested the coalition government was introducing a Section 28-style guideline for schools.
"As reported in The Sunday Telegraph yesterday, Education Correspondent Julie Henry wrote that there are plans to "protect children from inappropriate teaching materials and learn the nature of marriage and its importance for family life and for bringing up children..."
Ah, the chair of LGBTory, eh Peter?
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he?
What did you expect this gay Uncle Tom to say exactly?
So what did he tell you?
"It's a total non-story. Funding agreements under the last government had exactly the same wording. It's in the Education Act 2000 section 148 and the exact wording is copied into the funding agreement..."
Really?
Both the relevant clauses are quoted - in full - at the end of the Telegraph piece.
Shall we compare and contrast?
Sex and Relationship Education Guidance, July 2000
Pupils should be taught about the nature and importance of marriage for family life and bringing up children. But the Government recognises that there are strong and mutually supportive relationships outside marriage. Therefore pupils should learn the significance of marriage and stable relationships as key building blocks of community and society. Care needs to be taken to ensure that there is no stigmatisation of children based on their home circumstances.
Free School Model Funding Agreement and Academy Model Funding Agreement, July 2011
"The Academy Trust shall have regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State on sex and relationship education to ensure that children at the academy are protected from inappropriate teaching materials and they learn the nature of marriage and its importance for family life and for bringing up children."
The new funding agreement stops there - check it here.
So it's not "exactly the same wording", is it?
The Tories have decided not to include these all-important sentences;
"But the Government recognises that there are strong and mutually supportive relationships outside marriage. Therefore pupils should learn the significance of marriage and stable relationships as key building blocks of community and society. Care needs to be taken to ensure that there is no stigmatisation of children based on their home circumstances."
Perhaps Pink Paper and LGBTory could explain why?
One can only presume they don't think they matter?
Posts
Actually, the longer piece is the guidance they should have regard to... there are examples of the same clause in 2006 (and earlier I understand) academy funding documents but not as clause 28... the telegraph is not comparing like with like... what's needed is the current guidance which I started looking for yesterday.
ReplyDeleteAlex x x
So why cut those lines then?
ReplyDeletevia @zoeimogen (and others):
ReplyDelete2001 Funding Model: http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/dfes_foi_119.pdf (See Clause 26 - 6.5MB PDF)
2006 Funding Model: http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/d/dfes_foi_279.pdf (See clause 29)
2011 Funding Model: http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools/a0074737/free-schools-model-funding-agreement (clause 28)
In July 2000 (this seems to be the latest guidance) the "Sex and Relationship Education Guidance" document was created - this seems to be the latest guidance I can find on the DfE website and seems to be the guidance referred to in the clauses above: https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DfES%200116%202000. The Telegraph quotes from Paragraph 4 of this document (on page 4). This is not a funding model and, as before, does not seem to have been changed/updated (yet). This is the document that we need to perhaps be keeping more of an eye on...
Having said that "Clause 28" is extremely provocative... may even be a distraction to draw us away from the guidance issue...
Alex
x x