B1462 – Educational Indoctrination Bill 2019

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
B1462 – Educational Indoctrination Bill 2019, TSR Government
A
BILL
TO

prevent the ‘extremist’ indoctrination of pupils in educational institutions.

BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

1 - Definitions
(1) Where referenced in this Act, the following words are to be defined as follows:-
(X) (a) as defined by the Education Act 1996:
(X) (X) (i) ‘School’ shall refer to any educational institution which is simultaneously outside of the further education and higher education sector, yet remains a institution with provisions to provide any combination of primary, and/or secondary education.
(X) (X) (ii) ‘Pupil’ shall refer to any person and/or entity to whom provisions for education are made;
(X) (b) for the sole purpose of this Act:-
(X) (X) (i) ‘Educational institution’ shall refer to an institution or establishment at which active provisions are made for education, regardless of the age of those to whom said education provisions have been made.
(X) (X) (ii) ‘Educational staff’ shall refer to those employed, through any mechanism, by schools or educational institutions; this includes but is not limited to: teachers; volunteers; entities/persons on the governing body; representatives of the local education authority; inspectors; management staff; receptionists; first aids; and, those in ‘temporary employment’, id est, those requested, or by their own accord desire, to attend school for the purpose of education, whether or not as an external speaker, teacher or observer.
(X) (X) (iii) ‘Indoctrination’ shall, at bare minimum, refer to the imbuement and inculcation of principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisations.
(X) (X) (iv) ‘Fundamental British values’, as specified by the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills, are to include democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect for and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs and for those without faith.
(X) (X) (v) ‘Data protection regulations’ shall refer to primary legislation, statutory instruments, and other regulations that make provisions pertaining to the processing of personal data, make provisions for the regulation of the processing of information relating to individuals, and make provisions in connection with the Information Commissioner’s functions under certain regulations relating to information; where referenced in this Act, ‘data protection regulations’ are to primarily refer to the the Data Protection Act 2018

2 - Existing legislation
(1) Sections 406 and 407 of the Education Act of 1996 shall remain unaffected.
(2) Where there are contradictions between the Education Act of 1996 and the Educational Indoctrination Act of 2018, the latter is to take precedence.

3 - Indoctrination
(1) The local education authority, governing body, head teacher and all members of staff in their individual capacity, are duly obliged to:-
(X) (a) forbid the pursuit of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies by educational staff that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisation;
(X) (b) forbid the promotion of partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies in the teaching of any subject in the school that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisation;

4 - Proscribed groups or organisations
(1) Proscribed groups or organisations shall refer to any individual, group, organisation or entity proscribed by Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Home Department under section 3 of the Terrorism Act of 2000.
(2) Any organisation proscribed by Her Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for the Home Department is said to have:-
(X) (a) committed or participated in acts of terrorism;
(X) (b) prepared for terrorism;
(X) (c) promoted, encourages or unlawfully glorified terrorism;
(X) (d) otherwise concerned themselves with terrorism.

5 - Action
(1) On notification of an act of indoctrination with indisputable and explicit links to proscribed groups or organisations, where said act goes against fundamental British values and where ample evidence confirming said act has been collected, or can be collected in due course, the local educational authority, the governing body and the headteacher are duly obliged to:-
(X) (a) notify the police, and where necessary and requested, hold the member of educational staff, using reasonable force, on the educational institution’s premises, where the safety of pupils and fellow members of education staff are not at risk, until the member of education staff is under the control/possession of the Police.
(X) (b) immediately surrender all files, information and known assets of the member of education staff to the relevant authority
(X) (c) within twenty-four hours, notify the Secretary of State for Education, the Department for Education, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Home Department, and the Home Office.
(X) (d) within seventy-two hours, convene an emergency meeting of the governing body with compulsory attendance, under the sole premise of total confidentiality, with at least one representative from each of the following:-
(X) (X) (i) the local educational authority,
(X) (X) (ii) the Department of Education,
(X) (X) (iii) CONTEST,
(X) (X) (iv) the Home Office.
(X) (e) if and when appropriate, notify all parents of pupils currently in attendance at the educational institution, as well as all those who may have come into contact with the affected member of educational staff unless the parties detailed in subsection (c) or subsection (d) raise concerns in doing so.
(2) The pure teaching, without glorification and indoctrination, of the actions, methods and ideologies of proscribed organisations in an educational environment for the purposes of informing pupils shall remain unaffected by this Act - that is to say, the procedures detailed in S(5)(1) are not to occur.


6 - Records
(1) The local education authority, governing body and the school must keep dedicated records of recorded instances of ‘indoctrination’.
(2) Records of ‘indoctrination’ must include, at the bare minimum:-
(X) (a) the name of the member of educational staff;
(X) (b) the date and approximate time of the instance of indoctrination;
(X) (c) the pupil(s) affected by indoctrination;
(X) (d) the type of indoctrination;
(X) (e) the exact actions and/or words;
(X) (f) at least two ‘independent’ witnesses - this may be replaced with closed circuit television footage obtained by the educational institution or unaltered multimedia sources exterior to the educational institution where the legitimacy of said source can be verified to a probability that exceeds 80%.
(3) These records must be available on demand, in full, to the Secretary of State, and provided to the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills at regular intervals.
(4) These records may also be provided through the application of external legislation:
(X) (a) Where a request for the aforementioned records has been made to the educational institution under the entitlements as detailed under data protection regulations, the educational institution must, in accordance with said data protection regulations, provide the full entry with the following redacted:-
(X) (X) (i) personal details, other than his/her name, relating to the member of educational staff;
(X) (X) (ii) explicit details relating to the member of educational staff’s racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious beliefs, membership of trade unions, physical or mental health or condition, sexual life, the commission or alleged commission by him of any offence, or any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him, the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings;
(X) (X) (iii) identifying information in regards to the ‘independent’ witnesses;
(X) (b) Where a request for the aforementioned records has been made to the educational institution under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the educational institution must, in accordance with data protection regulations, provide the full entry requested with the following redacted:-
(X) (X) (i) personal details, other than his/her name, relating to the member of educational staff;
(X) (X) (ii) explicit details relating to the member of educational staff’s racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious beliefs, membership of trade unions, physical or mental health or condition, sexual life, the commission or alleged commission by him of any offence, or any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him, the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings;
(X) (X) (iii) personal details or identifying information relating to the pupil(s) involved;
(X) (X) (iv) identifying information in regards to the ‘independent’ witnesses;
(X) (c) With application to subsection (4)(b) and in accordance with section 14 of the Freedom of Information Act of 2000 and data protection regulations, an educational institution may refuse compliance with a request on the basis that:-
(X) (X) (i) the request, in terms of resources, is projected to exceed the ‘appropriate limit’ of £600;
(X) (X) (ii) the request is deemed as ‘vexatious’;
(X) (X) (iii) the request is one to which the educational institution on a prior occasion complied with under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 within a reasonable time interval;

7 - Short title and extent
(1) This Act may be cited as the Educational Indoctrination Act 2019.
(2) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
(3) This Act is to come into effect on the 1st of September 2019


Notes
The current provisions for educational indoctrination as detailed in the Terrorism Act 2000 and Sections 406 and 407 of the Education Act of 1996 are vague, and fail to include explicit procedural remediatory action as to protect the integrity of the education system and protect the most vulnerable in our society - children - from being imbued with toxic partisan principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies by educational staff that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisations - organisations that explicitly wish to destroy our society and removing all liberties and freedoms. This Bill removes all ambiguity.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
See the last time this bill was submitted and brite forced through despite making a sensible education illegal due to the absurd definition of indoctrination
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
See the last time this bill was submitted and brite forced through despite making a sensible education illegal due to the absurd definition of indoctrination
What exactly is absurd about the definition?

‘Indoctrination’ shall, at bare minimum, refer to the imbuement and inculcation of principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisations.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
Aye.

This bill has my full and unwavering support.
0
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
Makes perfect sense to me, aye.
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
****’s sake not again.

No, you can find my justification in the previous three times this was submitted.

I am shocked that the Conservative Party has time to produce this education bill but seemingly hasn’t had time for the Secretary of State to reinstate the 2012 employment regulations under the Qualifications of Teachers (Repeal) Act.

Let it be known that the Tories care more about shutting down free speech in classrooms than implementing the sovereign law of the land and ending the limbo that the teaching industry is currently stuck in.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by Connor27)
****’s sake not again.

No, you can find my justification in the previous three times this was submitted.

I am shocked that the Conservative Party has time to produce this education bill but seemingly hasn’t had time for the Secretary of State to reinstate the 2012 employment regulations under the Qualifications of Teachers (Repeal) Act.

Let it be known that the Tories care more about shutting down free speech in classrooms than implementing the sovereign law of the land and ending the limbo that the teaching industry is currently stuck in.
Firstly, though I am sure many would argue against me, I believe that 'repealing' a repeal would bring back the original piece of legislation or regulation in this case; whatever the case, a statement (in the form of a Ministerial Report utilising prerogative) will be issued confirming that the 2012 regulations are now in place.

In respect to 'shutting down free speech', this Bill does no such thing; this Bill prevents the perverse indoctrination of children in our education system by opportunistic supporters of proscribed organisations.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by ns_2)
What exactly is absurd about the definition?

‘Indoctrination’ shall, at bare minimum, refer to the imbuement and inculcation of principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisations.
It is absurd because a definition should be as simple as possible so as to make it as easy to understand as possible, that means it should be as short as possible whilst still conveying full meaning as well as using language that is as simple as possible. This is neither as short as possible nor in language as simple as possible. The OED definition is 15 words long (The process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically) and has no complex language, yours is 32 words long and has words that the vast majority of people would have to look up to understand. It is an absurd definition on that front (the best bit is that the simplest way to define "inculation" is "indoctrination" and appears to be near universally given as a definition, so you're defining a word with a synonym)

Indoctrination shall, at the bare minimum, refer to the imbuement and inculation education through repetition of principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies ideologies that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisations

the "at the bare minimum" isn't needed so that can go and cut 4 words and two commas; imbuement and inculation is a fancy way of saying education through repetition; "cognitive strategies" doesn't really make any sense in the definition and one could argue neither does professional methodologies (certainly without harming education, which we will come to later). We also get that the principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, and attitudes of a proscribed group are all very similar or even the same and can simply be replaced with "ideologies" and finally the "that have indisputable and explicit links to" can be simplified to "of" which leaves us with

Indoctrination shall refer to the education through repetition of ideologies of proscribed organisations

Now we've cut the definition down a little and simplified it to make it a good definition but now it no longer impresses with language that people need to look up so we may as well just use the basic definition as in the dictionary.

So now we have a big problem because the simplified definition of indoctrination is the teaching of the ideologies of proscribed organisations via a method that is very common in general education, that is repetition. This causes massive problems, in particular in history because with a great many things, including very significant events in British history such as WWII and The Troubles a proper education on the topic requires understanding the enemy, in the case of WWII we need to learn about the Nazis and to at least some extent their ideology which would amount to indoctrination as Naziism is inextricably linked to several proscribed groups. The same goes for the Arab side of the Arab-Israeli Crisis which is a common history topic, and the assorted Irish Nationalist Paramilitary groups in the troubles.

The irony is that the application of the definition you give would lead to indoctrination, it would not be legal to teach why the Nazis were wrong because to do that would require teaching the ideology, you are therefore teaching children to accept the belief that the Nazis were bad uncritically, to critically teach them would require "indoctrination"

The simplest way to resolve this issue is to just use the dictionary definition, this is something you have been told multiple times by multiple people from multiple parties and it never happened, I would assume it's because it would bruise your ego too much.

---------------------------------------

The other problem, which has also been brought up every single time, is a very simple question: why is this needed?

Just like your bill trying to force old people off the roads this is a solution looking for a problem.
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
(Original post by ns_2)
Firstly, though I am sure many would argue against me, I believe that 'repealing' a repeal would bring back the original piece of legislation or regulation in this case; whatever the case, a statement (in the form of a Ministerial Report utilising prerogative) will be issued confirming that the 2012 regulations are now in place.

In respect to 'shutting down free speech', this Bill does no such thing; this Bill prevents the perverse indoctrination of children in our education system by opportunistic supporters of proscribed organisations.
It is a simple fact that repealing repeals do not bring back the original, there is no arguing about it just like there was no excuse for not releasing a short statement yesterday.

As above, this bill does not prevent perverse indoctrination, it prevents education (a common theme for your government given it fought tooth and nail against ensuring all classrooms have teachers) and introduces indoctrination to try to solve a problem that simply does not exist.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
It is absurd because a definition should be as simple as possible so as to make it as easy to understand as possible, that means it should be as short as possible whilst still conveying full meaning as well as using language that is as simple as possible. This is neither as short as possible nor in language as simple as possible. The OED definition is 15 words long (The process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically) and has no complex language, yours is 32 words long and has words that the vast majority of people would have to look up to understand. It is an absurd definition on that front (the best bit is that the simplest way to define "inculation" is "indoctrination" and appears to be near universally given as a definition, so you're defining a word with a synonym)

Indoctrination shall, at the bare minimum, refer to the imbuement and inculation education through repetition of principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies ideologies that have indisputable and explicit links to proscribed organisations

the "at the bare minimum" isn't needed so that can go and cut 4 words and two commas; imbuement and inculation is a fancy way of saying education through repetition; "cognitive strategies" doesn't really make any sense in the definition and one could argue neither does professional methodologies (certainly without harming education, which we will come to later). We also get that the principles, opinions, points of view, ideals, and attitudes of a proscribed group are all very similar or even the same and can simply be replaced with "ideologies" and finally the "that have indisputable and explicit links to" can be simplified to "of" which leaves us with

Indoctrination shall refer to the education through repetition of ideologies of proscribed organisations

Now we've cut the definition down a little and simplified it to make it a good definition but now it no longer impresses with language that people need to look up so we may as well just use the basic definition as in the dictionary.

So now we have a big problem because the simplified definition of indoctrination is the teaching of the ideologies of proscribed organisations via a method that is very common in general education, that is repetition. This causes massive problems, in particular in history because with a great many things, including very significant events in British history such as WWII and The Troubles a proper education on the topic requires understanding the enemy, in the case of WWII we need to learn about the Nazis and to at least some extent their ideology which would amount to indoctrination as Naziism is inextricably linked to several proscribed groups. The same goes for the Arab side of the Arab-Israeli Crisis which is a common history topic, and the assorted Irish Nationalist Paramilitary groups in the troubles.

The irony is that the application of the definition you give would lead to indoctrination, it would not be legal to teach why the Nazis were wrong because to do that would require teaching the ideology, you are therefore teaching children to accept the belief that the Nazis were bad uncritically, to critically teach them would require "indoctrination"

The simplest way to resolve this issue is to just use the dictionary definition, this is something you have been told multiple times by multiple people from multiple parties and it never happened, I would assume it's because it would bruise your ego too much.

---------------------------------------

The other problem, which has also been brought up every single time, is a very simple question: why is this needed?

Just like your bill trying to force old people off the roads this is a solution looking for a problem.
I thank you for your actually constructive comments.

The definition of indoctrination will subsequently be changed to "the education through repetition of ideologies of proscribed organisations, lacking criticism or evaluation" - thus focusing on the genuine indoctrination, and not simply educating.

In respect to the purpose of this Bill, this Bill was originally designed as a Bill strengthening all aspects of indoctrination (not simply that of proscribed organisations, but of politics) an innate issue as certain teachers feel that it is their moral duty to impart a specific political belief on their pupils uncritically; this Bill focuses primarily on the toxic indoctrination that seeks to undermines our society and threatens our security.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
I shall find some of my earlier comments and repost them. One sec.

EDIT:

Okay so main problem, "fundamental British values" is not a fixed term. Surely as cultures changes so does the values represented therein? It is therefore impossible to have values that are fundamental to a society set into law which is fixed, if amendable.

In tandem with this, is the use of the word "indisputable", unchanged from the very first reading of this. I'd argue that everything is disputable and therefore if something as flimsy as a notion of "values" must be indisputable in order for section 5 to become active legislation then it's never going to.

This act therefore cannot actually be feasibly implemented, even if it was passed.

Therefore no.

My other issue is that in a tiny tiny tiny number of cases is this act in any way relevant. Whilst I don't wish to see school staff promoting terrorism generally people who go into the profession don't have that sort of agenda, and usually have the opposite. A tiny minority of cases can be used to say that this is a problem, but I'd argue that it's a problem which varies depending on communities, it should therefore be the choice of local government to decide policy in response to this potential thread, and release a statement from the home office saying the emergency services will work with local authorities accordingly.
Last edited by 04MR17; 1 year ago
0
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
(Original post by ns_2)
I thank you for your actually constructive comments.

The definition of indoctrination will subsequently be changed to "the education through repetition of ideologies of proscribed organisations, lacking criticism or evaluation" - thus focusing on the genuine indoctrination, and not simply educating.

In respect to the purpose of this Bill, this Bill was originally designed as a Bill strengthening all aspects of indoctrination (not simply that of proscribed organisations, but of politics) an innate issue as certain teachers feel that it is their moral duty to impart a specific political belief on their pupils uncritically; this Bill focuses primarily on the toxic indoctrination that seeks to undermines our society and threatens our security.
They are the exact same constructive comments that were made however many years ago. No matter what I will be voting against this however: first because of the immense arrogance of yourself and your party for refusing to make these incredibly simple changes before when you were confident you could simply force it through, despite all sides of the house objecting to the definitions; second because you are yet to explain why it is needed, you say what the purpose is but you do not say why existing legislation is insufficient, either this change is needed in which case you can explain why the existing legislation is insufficient, or it is change for the sake of change.
1
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
They are the exact same constructive comments that were made however many years ago. No matter what I will be voting against this however: first because of the immense arrogance of yourself and your party for refusing to make these incredibly simple changes before when you were confident you could simply force it through, despite all sides of the house objecting to the definitions; second because you are yet to explain why it is needed, you say what the purpose is but you do not say why existing legislation is insufficient, either this change is needed in which case you can explain why the existing legislation is insufficient, or it is change for the sake of change.
The current legislation lacks the defined structure, and action in instances of indoctrination: focusing solely on political indoctrination. It is imperative that there is no legal grey area in terms of those who perversely harm some of the most vulnerable in society.
0
Mr T 999
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by ns_2)
The current legislation lacks the defined structure, and action in instances of indoctrination: focusing solely on political indoctrination. It is imperative that there is no legal grey area in terms of those who perversely harm some of the most vulnerable in society.
So change for the sake of change. The current system seems fine to me.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#15
This bill is in cessation.
0
Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#16
This bill has gone to a second reading.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Regarding Ofqual's most recent update, do you think you will be given a fair grade this summer?

Yes (108)
27.98%
No (278)
72.02%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed