• Home
• UK Politics
• World Politics
• Policy
• Media
• Lifestyle
• Sport
• Contributors
• Topics

Is This Labour's Section 28?

Ben Austwick examines Amendment 70, a controversial amendment that seemingly crept under the media radar.

By Ben Austwick

11 Jul 2011, 23:11

Early last year the Children, Schools and Families Act 2010 came into law, providing parents and the general public with, amongst other things, a guarantee about what will be taught to children in school. Very good, I hear you say? Well, there’s one slightly controversial bit and it involves the following part of Clause 11:

(7) The third principle is that PSHE should be taught in a way that—
(a) endeavours to promote equality,
(b) encourages acceptance of diversity, and
(c) emphasises the importance of both rights and responsibilities.

PSHE is part of the curriculum in England and Northern Ireland and is an acronym for Personal, Social and Health Education. This non-academic subject covers various topics such as drugs, relationships, sexual intercourse and sexuality, aiming to assist students in personal development outside of the classroom. The clause, as you can see eliminates bias or prejudice when subjects arise that may conflict with the teacher’s personal beliefs.

However, an amendment was added and accepted...

Amendment 70
Page 14, line 6 [Clause 11], at end insert—

(7A) Subsections (4) to (7) are not to be read as preventing the governing body or head teacher of a school from causing or allowing PSHE to be taught in a way that reflects the school’s religious character.

Subsections (4) to (6) are similar to (7).

What does this mean? Well you don’t have to promote equality, encourage the acceptance of diversity or emphasise the importance of rights if you’re a religious school and it goes against the religion’s beliefs.

It’s my view that religion should play no part in education other than in Religious Education where it should be taught from a neutral perspective - why should religious schools be allowed to teach students that homosexuality is wrong or promote sex without a condom? It’s irresponsible and isn’t in any sane way ‘educating’ the child.

I’m surprised that this has evaded public attention for so long The British Humanism Association unsurprisingly released a press statement but the media failed to pick up on it - just imagine the outcry if a Conservative government had added this amendment!

Is this Labour’s ‘Section 28’? Possibly, but why hasn’t there been condemnation all round? Is it because the amendment doesn’t explicitly state homosexuality but includes it in the broad field of PSHE? This is a pointless and irresponsible amendment that should be repealed. What’s the point in having equality legislation when certain groups in society are exempt?