I am pleased that new clause 20 proposes to redefine sex education as “sex and relationship education”, although I would have put it the other way around, with the emphasis on relationships rather than sex. After agreeing on the wording, I part company with those who tabled the new clause.
5.30 pm
I want to concentrate on one aspect of the new clause: the implications of the proposal for a centralised curriculum. In March, the current PSHE legal framework was given backing in this House by the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for South West Norfolk (Elizabeth Truss), when she published the results of the Government’s recent PSHE review. She stated:
“To allow teachers the flexibility to deliver high-quality PSHE we consider it unnecessary to provide new standardised frameworks or programmes of study. Teachers are best placed to understand
the needs of their pupils and do not need additional central prescription.”—[
Official Report
, 21 March 2013; Vol. 560, c. 52WS.]
I believe that was right and that the curriculum centralisation that would inevitably follow endeavours such as new clause 20 would not advance the cause of PSHE or, critically, the interests of our young people. To clarify, we currently have compulsory sex education in secondary schools, but governors of primary schools are at liberty to authorise the teaching of sex education if they think it appropriate.
Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op): I understand that the hon. Lady’s concern is about a centralised curriculum. What does she make of her Government’s proposal to put gardening and composting on the national curriculum, as well as financial education and compound interest? Surely along with those two Cs we should also put consent.
Fiona Bruce: I am vice-chair of the all-party group on financial education for young people and I hugely welcome that proposal. I think it is an essential ingredient of enabling our young people to mature and face society when they leave school.
At present we do not have a centralised curriculum, and I cannot support proposals for the centralisation of the curriculum as suggested by the champions of the new clause. Research demonstrates that children and young people want to receive their initial sex and relationship education from their parents and families, with school and other adults building on that later. I am not naive and I fully appreciate that many parents do not fulfil their parental duties in that respect. That is why it is essential that we have sex education in senior schools, and I do not deny the importance of that for one minute, for many of the reasons mentioned by the hon. Member for Wigan (Lisa Nandy) when she introduced the new clause.
Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab): What does the hon. Lady make of the recent Ofsted report on the teaching of PSHE, which mentions its variability around the country, particularly in sex and relationship education?
Fiona Bruce: I am glad the hon. Lady raised that point, because if some of the suggestions that I will come to in my speech were implemented, we would have much better sex education throughout the country than we do at present. She is right. Much still needs to be done, and I said in my introductory remarks that I am concerned about the standard of sex education in our schools, although I do not believe a centralised curriculum will improve that.
Several hon. Members rose—
Fiona Bruce: I will not take any other interventions, because it would reduce the time for other speakers.
The Department for Education’s sex and relationship education guidance honours the involvement of parents, making plain the need for parental involvement in the content of PSHE. It states:
“Parents are the key people in teaching their children about sex and relationships, maintaining the culture and ethos of the family, helping their children cope with the emotional and physical aspects of growing up, and preparing them for the challenges and
responsibilities that sexual maturity brings…schools should always work in partnership with parents, consulting them regularly on the content of sex and relationship education programmes.”
The majority of respondents to the recent Government consultation on PSHE believed that parental engagement was crucial, as was providing parents with every possible and practical opportunity to interact and engage with PSHE provision.
Although we should understand the important role that sex education provides, we should not aspire for it narrowly within one context. Current procedures provide a mechanism for drawing in parents who perhaps do not talk to their children about sex and relationships, and encourage those who do to continue with that. At present, all secondary schools must provide sex education by law, and although there is no centrally determined curriculum, governors and teachers, in conversation and consultation with parents, should develop a curriculum on a school-by-school basis, according to the ethos of the school. When properly applied, that decentralised approach means that this sensitive subject can be framed in a manner that has regard for parental views and concerns.If the curriculum were set centrally, that could and probably would disappear.
Currently, a good school should always contact parents to let them know when the sex education curriculum is taught, precisely so that they can follow up with their own conversations at home. The current procedures encourage parental involvement, but new clause 20 would serve only to diminish it. I cannot agree that that is the right approach at a time when many people are concerned that we live in a society in which opportunities for parental involvement and influence need strengthening and encouraging, not reducing and diminishing. Throughout this afternoon’s debate, I have repeatedly heard Ministers and others say how important it is to take into account parents’ views with regard to other aspects of education. Surely that should apply in this critical area of a child’s education.
That does not mean that I am complacent about the current approach—far from it. There is tremendous room for improvement in our relationship and sex education, not least the fact that greater emphasis needs to be placed on the duty to consult parents and communicate clearly with them about what is being taught. Some head teachers believe they must exclusively use whatever resources are recommended by their local authority, but in fact a plethora of other good materials provided by outside agencies can be used, such as the Evaluate: Informing Choice programme. Other head teachers do not accept that the decision should be for the governing body, which has a vital role. I encourage governors actively to take up that role in all schools.
New clause 20 would be a mistake and I hope the Government firmly reject it. However, I ask Ministers to tell us what plans the Government have to make the current decentralised approach to the critical area of sex education work more effectively, so that parents are more and not less involved, as is intended, and so help our next generation to form and sustain healthy, fulfilling and enduring personal relationships and family lives.
