School report: compromise over yeshivah regulation remains far-off - The Jewish Chronicle

Strictly Orthodox demonstrators turned out in force again in Westminister last week as the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill passed its third reading in the Commons. For MPs, the main bone of contention has been the government’s desire for greater control of academies. But in the Chasidic stronghold of Stamford Hill, the burning issue in the Bill is the proposal to regulate yeshivot.

Until now, talmudic academies have not been counted as schools because of their exclusive religious curriculum. But the government wants to tweak the law in order to extend to them the regulations that currently apply to independent schools. It also wants local authorities to compile a register of children who are taught at home or in out-of-school settings in order to keep tabs on their whereabouts.

Charedi traditionalists fear yeshivot will then have to introduce secular subjects as well as undergo external inspections. But if they fail to comply with independent school standards, ultimately they could face closure. Of course, not everyone in the Charedi community would be affected: some already send their sons to school where they take GCSEs (although it is common for them to do this in year 10 and then move on to yeshivah).

For yeshivah advocates, the government’s move is an attempt to impose secular values on a hallowed education system and an attack on the rights of a religious minority. For defenders of the proposals, it is about the right of a child to have a broad enough education to be able to make choices in later life.

The Union of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations, the umbrella body for London’s Charedi synagogues, argues that yeshivot should be exempt from the proposed regulations because students are home-schooled for secular subjects. In other words, it is the responsibility of parents to make sure their children are getting suitable tuition – and the yeshivot should be left alone.

So far, the government has shown little appetite for compromise. Yes, some MPs have queried whether the amount of information that parents will be required to submit for the register is excessive. But the principle of registration retains wide cross-party support and, even if the odd dissenting voice in the Lords raises concerns about an overreaching state, widespread rebellion there looks unlikely.

While Charedi representatives insist that yeshivot maintain robust safeguarding standards, that is likely to cut little ice unless these can be validated by an external authority. The yeshivah lobby would have a stronger hand in appealing for exemption if it could show that the vast majority of boys who attend one at least attain qualifications in English and maths.

The protesters, however, are adamant that no concession is possible: an immersive talmudic education is fundamental to their way of life. But what will be the reaction when the measures set out in the Bill, as is probable, become law? I have been told that many families will simply send their children to be educated overseas – to Israel, for example. Someone even suggested that the idea of establishing yeshivot in other European countries had been mooted.

Even if hundreds of yeshivah students were to remain here, there could be practical problems in enforcing the law. How would councils, already under enormous financial pressure, find the number of officers they would need to pay home visits in a place like Stamford Hill with its sizeable Charedi population?

If children were deemed by the council to be receiving an inadequate education, they could be slapped with a school attendance order. But then where would be the schools able to accommodate such potentially large numbers?

As the prospect of legislation nears, perhaps that might prompt a move towards negotiation. But at the moment the only thing one can be sure of, as the Bill makes its way through the Lords, is that the protests will continue.

Topics: