Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council accepting the appointment of a person she says poses a risk to children by virtue of their employment to a position on the local Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education. We cannot investigate religious education and worship in schools. The Council’s role is marginal, and we would be unlikely to find fault in the Council not finding a safeguarding risk simply because the person works for a local organisation whose employees Ms X says have attempted to proselytise children in schools.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council has wrongly accepted the appointment of a person to the local Statutory Advisory Council on Religious Education (SACRE). She says it is wrong to accept the person’s assurance that they will not attempt to proselytise children in the role as the organisation that employs them has previously done so in schools.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
 

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate most complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(2), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The content of religious education and worship in schools is an internal school matter. A legal bar prevents us investigating that.
8. Proselytising is the attempted conversion of a person to another religious view in an unreasonable way. In the context of education, a person representing their faith may be invited by a school, whether a faith school or not, to lead an assembly and/or explain their views. That is not automatically proselytising, though it could become so if the person attempts to persuade or pressurise a child to change their religious view.
9. The Council’s role is limited. SACRE is not a Council function, and the Council’s role relating to it only extends to ensuring an equal representation of various faith groups, including evangelical Christians, who hold a specific view of Christianity that involves spreading their faith. The Council can also consider if any adult having contact with children poses a risk. Were we to investigate, it is unlikely we would find the Council should have deemed a person a risk as a member of the local SACRE simply because another employee of the same organisation working in local schools may previously have attempted to proselytise a child in a school. I note Ms X has not claimed the person has attempted to proselytise any child of hers.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because doing so would be unlikely to lead to any worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman