Presently before Parliament is the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill. This great sprawling piece of legislation comprises no less than 256 clauses and 16 Schedules. And lurking therein is a clause that is causing some alarm in informed circles.

In the context of every public exam in England, clause 138(1) states that “The Secretary of State may make a determination specifying minimum requirements in respect of a specified qualification, or description of qualification, to which this Part applies”. Guidance in the form of explanatory notes published alongside the Bill says this power could, for example, be used to specify “which authors’ works needed to be studied for someone to gain a GCSE in English”. We are assured that this clause “restricts the Secretary of State to specifying minimum requirements relating, in effect, to the content of a qualification”, and not grading or assessment, and will “be used only in exceptional circumstances”. But they would say that, wouldn’t they.

Exam boards are concerned that the scope of the power is too broad. Opposition MPs are attempting to have this clause removed from the bill, fearing that it will strengthen governmental ability to interfere with the curriculum for political gain. The ‘Guardian’ reported David Laws, the Liberal Democrat education spokesman, as saying that what is taught in schools should not be dependent upon the whim of politicians and added that “the idea of Ed Balls or Gordon Brown determining which parts of history children are taught” is a frightening one. What price a modern history question on the origins of the Iraq war?

Also reported by the ‘Guardian’, schools minister Sarah McCarthy-Fry has promised a memorandum setting out exactly when ministers could use the new power. She added that ministers “will only use powers with regard to the curriculum in exceptional circumstances – for example, intervening to ensure Shakespeare remains a core part of what our children learn”. But it is an almost immutable rule that any piece of legislation left lying around will be used by somebody at sometime, usually after all the original assurances have been forgotten.