text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Education Bill - Exemption of Innovative Projects - rejected
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  
  
  <p>The majority Not-Content voters rejected an amendment<a href="#footnote-1"><sup>[1]</sup></a> to the <a href="http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts2002/ukpga_20020032_en_1">Education Bill</a>. The amendment would have allowed governing bodies to exempt innovative projects from education legislation. However, the Secretary of State could designate education legislation that they felt governing bodies should not be allowed to exempt themselves from. Nevertheless, the amendment was defeated.</p>
  
  <p>The Education Bill already gives schools the option of exempting themselves from legislation to allow them to innovate. However, each time they wanted to do this they would have to apply to the Secretary of State.</p>
  
  <p>Other aims of the Education Bill were to<a href="#footnote-2"><sup>[2]</sup></a>:</p>
  
  <ul><li>Give good schools the option of qualifying for greater flexibility in the National Curriculum and teachers' pay.</li>
  <li>Allow schools to join together in a federation under a single governing body.</li>
  <li>Further regulate school admissions, exclusions and attendance policies.</li>
  <li>Give the Secretary of State further powers to intervene in failing schools.</li>
  <li>Introduce a new regulatory regime for independent schools.</li></ul>
  
  <i><ul><li><p id="footnote-1">[1] <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?gid=2002-06-17a.492.2">Baroness Blatch,</a> House of Lords, 17 June 2002</p></li>
  
  <li><p id="footnote-2">[2] <a href="http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/educationoverview/educationact/summary/">TeacherNet Summary</a>, 17 September 2002</p></li></ul></i>
  
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  