Property Owned As Tenants In Common
Law0 min ago
Selfish Cheapskate Parenting Now Legal.........
183 Answers
http://
In order to get a cheaper holiday it's ok to degrade your child's education. Wonderful. Brainless parents win again. When will our dopey judges move to this planet?
In order to get a cheaper holiday it's ok to degrade your child's education. Wonderful. Brainless parents win again. When will our dopey judges move to this planet?
Answers
Oh dear! A topic (almost) as dear to my heart as the wretched EU! “When will our dopey judges move to this planet?” Alas it’s not the fault of dopey judges (even dopey New Judges!). It’s down to sloppy legislation. The 1996 Education Act simply says that parents must ensure that their children attend school “regularly
17:34 Fri 13th May 2016
Yes, Corby. What you refer to is “The Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006”
If you read it you will find:
“ABOUT THIS DEPARMENTAL ADVICE
This is advice from the Department for Education. This advice is non-statutory, and has been produced to help schools and local authorities maintain high levels of school attendance and plan the school day and year. “
Note: This is ADVICE…..[my emphasis]…This advice is non-statutory [i.e. not part of the law].
I have emphasised throughout this thread that the law has remained the same. It is the guidance (i.e. the “advice”) that has caused the problems. The Dept for Education believed that their advice to schools complied with the law. The High Court decided yesterday that it did not necessarily do so.
Many parents (like gness) are willing to and capable of taking part in and organising their childrens’ education. But many more are not. With this in mind it is clearly most unsatisfactory that parents should pick and choose when their children should attend school. The spirit of the law is that children should attend school when required (bar illness, injury and exceptional circumstances). Holidays are none of these and the letter of the law requires changing because parents can now not be relied upon to comply with a law that is so badly drafted.
Now I'm going to bed (again) :-)
If you read it you will find:
“ABOUT THIS DEPARMENTAL ADVICE
This is advice from the Department for Education. This advice is non-statutory, and has been produced to help schools and local authorities maintain high levels of school attendance and plan the school day and year. “
Note: This is ADVICE…..[my emphasis]…This advice is non-statutory [i.e. not part of the law].
I have emphasised throughout this thread that the law has remained the same. It is the guidance (i.e. the “advice”) that has caused the problems. The Dept for Education believed that their advice to schools complied with the law. The High Court decided yesterday that it did not necessarily do so.
Many parents (like gness) are willing to and capable of taking part in and organising their childrens’ education. But many more are not. With this in mind it is clearly most unsatisfactory that parents should pick and choose when their children should attend school. The spirit of the law is that children should attend school when required (bar illness, injury and exceptional circumstances). Holidays are none of these and the letter of the law requires changing because parents can now not be relied upon to comply with a law that is so badly drafted.
Now I'm going to bed (again) :-)
If only we could ensure that there are no changes in the education system for two or three years *except* this ruling - just long enough for any dip (or elevation!) in grades/performance measures to show up, in the stats.
Of course, in real life, they always change multiple things at once, so all cause and effect relationships become impossible to prove *or* disprove.
If we put politicians in charge of a steam engine, they'd twiddle every control in sight, in a random order, wondering why they can't get where they want to be and just shunt back and forth, ineffectually, like most countries do.
Education should never be a political plaything. There is only one task or instruction to delegate the education chiefs and we should let them and the teachers get on with it, the best they can.
Upward-delegated requests, such as "can you (MPs) give us some legislative control over wayward parents, please?" are fine and that's what this debate is about, as far as I'm concerned.
Of course, in real life, they always change multiple things at once, so all cause and effect relationships become impossible to prove *or* disprove.
If we put politicians in charge of a steam engine, they'd twiddle every control in sight, in a random order, wondering why they can't get where they want to be and just shunt back and forth, ineffectually, like most countries do.
Education should never be a political plaything. There is only one task or instruction to delegate the education chiefs and we should let them and the teachers get on with it, the best they can.
Upward-delegated requests, such as "can you (MPs) give us some legislative control over wayward parents, please?" are fine and that's what this debate is about, as far as I'm concerned.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.