| Home Page |
Column 125
House of Commons
Tuesday 2 February 1993
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]
PRIVATE BUSINESS
Allied Irish Banks Bill
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Thursday 4 February.
Oral Answers to Questions
EDUCATION
English
1. Mr. Bradley : To ask the Secretary of State for Education what representations he has received on the implementation of key stage 3 of the national curriculum in English.
4. Mrs. Anne Campbell : To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will undertake a pilot project in the 1993-94 academic year to test further the most appropriate way of delivering key stage 3 English in the national curriculum.
5. Mr. Milligan : To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on progress in introducing English tests in secondary schools.
The Secretary of State for Education (Mr. John Patten) : Tests provide vital information about children's progress. This is nowhere more important than in English, which is the bedrock of the curriculum.
The preparation of the 1993 English tests by the School Examinations and Assessment Council has been scrupulous. The tests have been tried out in hundreds of schools over the past two and half years. SEAC itself has responded to teachers' concerns by providing all the information that teachers need about the tests in January--a good five months before they are taken.
The tests will go ahead as planned ; anything less would be to let down pupils who have been following the national curriculum in English for the past three years.
Mr. Bradley : The Secretary of State clearly does not realise the anger and despair that he is causing in local schools by pressing ahead with key stage 3. Will he not today announce the postponement of the tests for at least one year and pick up the phone and talk to some of the teachers in my constituency at local schools such as Oakwood and Parrswood about the total lack of preparation time that they have been given? There has also been a complete lack of consultation on the adequacy of the tests, which are inadequate in relationship to the
Column 126
national curriculum. The Secretary of State should today call for a postponement, not for his sake or for my sake, but for the sake of our children's education.Mr. Patten : Over the past two and a half years the tests have been piloted in more than 500 schools, involving more than 45,000 children. There are two separate issues. First, the tests are new, and all new tests cause problems with people who have not conducted them before ; there are alleged teething problems, and I respect the views of teachers, including secondary school heads, who are always interested in getting the tests right.
Secondly, there is a totally separate agenda characterised by the National Union of Teachers which, in its "Anti-SATs News", states that it wishes to undermine the whole of the Government's testing regime. It states :
"The boycott of the Key Stage 3 English tests is the first step on this road."
Mrs. Campbell : Given the Secretary of State's well-known reluctance to listen to anyone with misgivings about the direction of his education policy, may I ask to whom he listened when he decided to change the national curriculum for English well before the time it was due for review and against the recommendations of the report of Warwick university?
Mr. Patten : The National Curriculum Council--professional advisers to the Secretary of State in England--felt that the English curriculum needed a review and that there should be much more concentration on the basics in the English curriculum. It is important that we do all that we can to ensure that the English national curriculum and the testing regime run as smoothly as possible. There are more than 4 million adult illiterates in this country, and the number has been rising since the 1960s --hence the critical importance of the testing : we need a benchmark against which to judge children's improved performance.
Mr. Milligan : I welcome what my right hon. Friend has just said. Is it not vital to introduce proper testing to reduce the number of illiterates in Britain, which is one of the most serious problems that we face? Will he recognise, however, that some head teachers in my constituency who support the principle of testing are concerned at the relatively rapid speed with which the English tests have been introduced? Is there not a case for a dry run this year, as was done with the maths and science tests last year?
Mr. Patten : Those are the kind of arguments that were put forward by head teachers, a great number of whom I have met in recent months to discuss those and other issues. In the run-up to the first ever proper tests in English for children aged seven in 1991 there were the same kind of fears and inhibitions, but the tests went ahead. They have given us a benchmark and have shown that, while between 1991 and 1992 the performance of children in English improved, lamentably, about one quarter of our children are still not performing adequately in English. We must begin to ensure that all our children get a fair deal, and testing is critical in that process.
Mr. Madel : Will my right hon. Friend consider sympathetically representations made to him by schools that have suddenly had to buy additional books for key stage 3 for which they had not budgeted?
Mr. Patten : I know the particular problems in Bedfordshire. My hon. Friend has been an assiduous
Column 127
promoter of the interests of schools in his county and his constituency. This year, there has been about £15 million additional support for books. Every time there is a new syllabus-- it is the same with GCSE and A-level--there can be additional demands. That is why I urge all local authorities to delegate as much of their budget as possible to schools, because less money spent on bureaucrats equals more money spent on books.Mrs. Ann Taylor : Will the Secretary of State correct his statement a few minutes ago that the tests have been piloted in hundreds of schools? Is it not a fact that the University of Cambridge local examinations syndicate obtained the contract for the tests last summer and that the tests have been piloted in only 32 schools involving pupils of the wrong age--15-year-olds and not 14-year-olds? Will the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge the point made by the hon. Member for Bedfordshire, South-West (Mr. Madel) and realise that it is not just in Bedfordshire that schools face financial problems as a result of the imposition of the tests? What does he intend to do about the fact that some of the books on the recommended list are out of print? Will he acknowledge that he cannot say that he respects teachers, parents and governors and then always refuse to listen to them?
Mr. Patten : No, and if the hon. Lady goes on like that some of my right hon. and hon. Friends will be putting in claims for damages for passive boring. The key stage 3 English tests have been prepared with more care and over a longer period than any other public examination.
Mr. Patrick Thompson : Will my right hon. Friend join me in supporting those teachers and their organisations who have set aside the idea of a boycott because they feel that that is not the right way forward? Does he agree that a boycott goes against the whole idea of teachers' professional standards and is not the right way to conduct a debate on this or any other issue?
Mr. Patten : Any boycott would do great damage to the teaching profession. Head teachers, whom I met as recently as last Friday in a group to discuss just this issue, all said that they did not wish to see any boycotting of the tests. However, I happen to know from the evidence that I put before the House a moment or two ago that the NUT now wishes to go completely against testing. I happen to think that that is becoming Labour party policy as well.
Grant-maintained Schools
2. Mr. Madden : To ask the Secretary of State for Education what representations he has received concerning the procedures associated with ballots for deciding whether schools become grant maintained.
Mr. Patten : My Department receives a number of letters, telephone calls and other representations concerning the procedures associated with ballots for deciding whether schools become grant maintained. Since the Education Reform Act 1988 came into force, we have received many useful suggestions about ways in which the grant-maintained ballot process could be improved. The Education Bill now before the House contains measures to smooth the process and to assist governors in putting their case to parents.
Column 128
Mr. Madden : Is the Secretary of State aware that despite the political vendetta that he has waged against Bradford local education authority-- [Interruption.] Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that opting out by schools in Bradford has been a complete and utter flop? Does he also accept that, however much he attempts further to rig balloting and other procedures, most sensible parents, when the full facts are placed before them, will reject the prospect of placing the fate and funding of local education authority schools in the hands of the Secretary of State or any of his successors?
Mr. Patten : I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is extremely important that parents, governors and the local community should have the full facts put before them in the most unemotional and non-political form possible. When information is presented in that way and parents have the chance to vote, we see the result in schools in Bradford such as Oakbank, which I can announce today has just become grant maintained. In Blackburn yesterday, a school voted to become grant maintained with a 70 per cent. turnout of parents and a massive majority in favour of grant-maintained status. Well-informed parents with the information before them should be left to make up their own minds and not be subjected to political bullying and harassment.
Dr. Spink : In view of the ever-increasing number of parents who are voting for their children's schools to become grant maintained and, therefore, to take control of those schools with true local accountability, what does my right hon. Friend think of the remark by the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor), the Labour Front-Bench education spokesman, that it is Labour's intention--
Madam Speaker : Order. [Interruption.] Order. The hon. Gentleman's remarks are completely out of order--and he paid no attention to me when I told him so. I call upon the Secretary of State to give a limited reply, provided that it does not relate to that part of the hon. Gentleman's question that was out of order.
Mr. Patten : That will be quite difficult, Madam Speaker. However, I hold my hon. Friend--the pride of Essex--in great esteem for the way in which he attempted to put on the record the fact that the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) has come out on grant-maintained schools--[ Hon. Members :-- "Order".] This is on grant-maintained schools solo--honest John Patten--honestly, Madam Speaker. Following the question of the hon. Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Madden), the hon. Lady said that it is now Labour party policy to return all grant-maintained schools to local authority control.
Special Needs
3. Ms. Walley : To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the adequacy of funds available for special needs education.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Mr. Eric Forth) : It is for local education authorities and schools with delegated management to decide on the level of funds to devote to special education. Well-run local authorities and schools should be able to fulfil their duties in respect of pupils with special educational needs.
Column 129
Ms. Walley : Although the Minister's answer sounds all well and good, does he not realise that the competitive direction in which he is leading local schools is causing anxiety to the parents of children requiring special needs education? Is he aware that in Staffordshire there has been an 18 per cent. increase in requests for formal assessment and that the average increase is the same throughout the country? Is it not the case that, as a result of the Government's so-called education reform, the budgets of local schools are so stretched and stressed that they cannot deal properly with special needs education?
Mr. Forth : I do not accept that. There is ample evidence that special educational needs are being well met by schools up and down the country, and by most local education authorities. Because the hon. Lady's authority, Staffordshire, started off with a somewhat lower percentage of statemented children, it has scope to catch up and there is evidence that it is doing just that. Although there is some evidence that more parents are asking for statements, there is also evidence of an increase in the amount of statementing done by that local education authority.
There has been a widespread welcome for the huge step that we are taking in the Education Bill now in Committee. We are introducing many radical new provisions for children with special educational needs and they have been welcomed throughout the community involved.
Mr. Rowe : Does my hon. Friend accept that it is not just a question of money? The provision of specialist help is also vital. Can my hon. Friend assure me that his Department is discussing the matter seriously both with health authorities and with social service departments, which are also purchasers of services such as speech therapy and psychology, so that the partnership between the three publicly funded bodies can be maximised?
Mr. Forth : Indeed. My hon. Friend has raised an important point. We are constantly aware of the need to ensure, wherever possible, that all authorities involved in and concerned with the meeting of special educational needs--for instance, education authorities, health authorities and social service departments--work co-operatively to ensure that they all discharge their various responsibilities together in making the best possible provision. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the matter.
Mr. Win Griffiths : Does the Minister realise that, although organisations dealing with special educational needs welcome a number of aspects of the Education Bill, they are nevertheless very fearful about funding levels? They have already presented evidence of a drop in provision of learning support services. With 120 cases involving statements going to judicial review, this is but the tip of the iceberg. The Minister's Department must take seriously the evidence of underfunding and lack of services for children with special educational needs, whether or not they have statements.
Mr. Forth : I do not think that that is right, although I accept part of what the hon. Gentleman has said--that the mechanism for providing statements for children with special educational needs has let down many children and parents progressively over the years. That is exactly why we propose to introduce, in the Bill now in Committee, a new code of practice to give guidance on the statementing
Column 130
procedure, new time limits and a tribunal to provide an independent source of appeal. I believe that all those measures will go a long way towards enabling the statementing process, which is vital to a small but important number of children with special educational needs, to work properly. As for the other children involved, we have strengthened the Bill's provisions to ensure not only that all schools are aware of their responsibilities, but that they spell out those responsibilities clearly. They will be inspected in regard to their responsibilities. That is the way in which to proceed.Mr. Bowis : Does my hon. Friend agree that, although resources for special educational needs must be kept under constant review, the clear message from the Audit Commission was that the problem was not lack of resources but the fact that some local education authorities did not give high enough priority to the statementing process? Will my hon. Friend send the message to every education authority in the country today that authorities should not wait for the measures in the Bill, good as they are, but should get on with the process now and protect the children currently in need?
Mr. Forth : My hon. Friend, who takes a great interest in such matters, is absolutely right. It is not so much a matter of the resources available as a question of how they are deployed. Many local education authorities have demonstrated that, with the right sense of priorities and the right management practices, they can fully fulfil their obligation to children with special educational needs. I believe that the Bill will provide the proper framework to ensure that all authorities do that in future ; in other words, it will enable us to raise all of them to the excellent standard of the best.
Graduates (Employment)
6. Mr. Ashton : To ask the Secretary of State for Education what percentage of university graduates left university last year and went straight into full-time employment.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Further and Higher Education (Mr. Tim Boswell) : Of those first-degree students whose first destination is known, about 50 per cent. went into full or part-time employment in the United Kingdom or overseas in 1991, the latest year for which figures are available.
Mr. Ashton : Is the Minister aware that the figures that I have obtained from the Library are very different? According to my figures, of 70,000 graduates, only 32,000 obtained jobs ; the rest had to go on studying, because they could not find work--apart from the 7,000 who were still on the dole six months later.
Is the Minister aware that unemployment among graduates has risen by 50 per cent. in three years? Why are we training these youngsters? Are we doing it to provide the best-educated dole queue in the world so that the Japanese can come in and exploit them as there is no minimum wage? What is the purpose of it all?
Mr. Boswell : The purpose of education is long term. It is to secure a trained, skilled and motivated work force in which graduates will play a leading part in terms of their chances of employment and their salary structure in the years to come. The hon. Gentleman has taken the worst
Column 131
possible construction of the figures. He has not, for example, looked at the "Graduate Employment Prospects Review" for the current year which, while stating that this is a difficult year, says that we are in a difficult but not impossible situation and that employers are optimistic about the future. The hon. Gentleman should not use the disappointments of today to dissuade people from going to college to build for their tomorrow and for the country's future.Mr. Hawkins : Will my hon. Friend join me in welcoming the fact that there are more than 40 per cent. more students in higher education now than there were in 1980? Will he also join me in condemning the reduction in grant for students, especially mature students, by the Labour-controlled Lancashire county council?
Mr. Boswell : I accept my hon. Friend's first point. There has been a huge expansion in graduate numbers, and I make no apology for that, as I do not want to return to elitism--I want people to go to college if they are qualified to do so.
As for further education and the discretionary awards in Lancashire, that is a matter for the council but also for the electors in May. I am sure that the electors of Lancashire will draw the appropriate conclusions.
Mr. Rooker : Does the Minister accept that investment in higher education is investment in the human capital of the nation, but that there may be a threat to the quality of that investment in higher education and to the quality of future graduates if the funding council is given control of quality in universities? Will not that pose a threat to academic freedom throughout the country--a threat which is as unacceptable from the right as it would be from the left? Self-regulation is good enough for the City, and in respect of quality it is better that self-regulation comes from the universities rather than being imposed on them by the funders, which would pose a threat to the quality of future graduates.
Mr. Boswell : I agree with the hon. Gentleman about one objective-- that investment in higher education is clearly an investment in the country's future. That is right. With respect, however, I disagree with him on his point about quality and the analogy that he drew with the City. So far as I know, the City does not run on taxpayers' money-- [Interruption.] Higher education is financed with several billion pounds of taxpayers' money and we wish to ensure proper value for money-- not on my account, but through the Universities Funding Council, which is to establish an independent and proper system of assessment of the quality delivered.
Mr. John Marshall : Will my hon. Friend confirm that since the introduction of student loans there has been a substantial increase in the number of students going to university? Does that not give the lie to the prophets of doom whose forecasts were as inaccurate as their policies are unacceptable?
Mr. Boswell : I very much agree with my hon. Friend. We want people to go to university. We are delivering that, and the quality and standards in universities to go with it. We have no apology to make.
Column 132
Teacher Morale
7. Mr. Barry Jones : To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on the morale of teachers in local education authority schools.
Mr. Patten : Teachers have responded admirably to the challenge of raising standards and extending choice, and the Government and the country are grateful to them. The Government's reforms have helped parents to appreciate how much good teaching contributes to their children's education. Effective management at school level is the key to motivating teachers and ensuring that good performance is identified and rewarded.
Mr. Jones : After the waves of change and legislation, why do Ministers not slow down and, in particular, listen? It would help. Why has the right hon. Gentleman been so rude to parents and so condescending to the profession? Does he not know that he is seen as a posturing and dictatorial figure in education--in fact, as a sort of Mussolini of the school service?
Mr. Patten : I shall not take that accusation of fascism to heart, Madam Speaker, and nor will you. I suppose that it is the kind of thing that we expect to hear from the hon. Gentleman Member for Alyn and Deeside (Mr. Jones), who is a parliamentary consultant to the National Union of Teachers. It is always important to know which hon. Member is the parliamentary consultant for the National Union of Teachers because he or she will remain a marked person for the rest of this Parliament.
Since last April, my right hon. and noble Friend Baroness Blatch in the other place, my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Forth) and I have been to more than 75 schools, not talking at teachers but listening to them. Perhaps I could give the hon. Member an example. When Baroness Blatch, my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Worcestershire and I visited those schools, we were told by a number of primary school teachers that they felt that the national curriculum was a bit overcrowded.
In response to listening to teachers, we announced two Mondays ago that we would introduce over a period a review of the national curriculum. There is no going slow on the Government's schools policy.
Mr. Barry Jones : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am not a parliamentary consultant for the National Union of Teachers. Mr. Patten rose --
Madam Speaker : Order. I call Mr. Clappison. [Interruption.] Order. How can I hear unless hon. Members are quiet?
Mr. Patten : Further to that point of order--
Madam Speaker : Order. There can be no point of order in the middle of Question Time. Perhaps we can deal with the matter at the end of Question Time.
Mr. Clappison : Will my right hon. Friend join me in expressing concern at the destructive effects on the morale of teachers, parents and pupils of the small minority of teachers who undermine testing and water down standards in our schools, as in the case of the small minority of
Column 133
English teachers who want to set aside our rich literary heritage and abandon Shakespeare? Is that a case not so much of morale as of fitness to teach?Mr. Patten : I think that we should be grateful to all teachers who work hard. There is always a small group of people who simply do not like the way in which a Government conduct their education policy. It is those people, especially in the National Union of Teachers, who have been waging such a battle against testing. I predict that we will see the Labour party fight hard in an attempt to undermine our education reforms. It was from the Register of Members' Interests that I took the attribution to the hon. Member for Alyn and Deeside.
Grant-maintained Schools
8. Mr. Pope : To ask the Secretary of State for Education what arrangements will be made to protect the interests of staff at a school that transfers from local education authority control to grant-maintained status.
Mr. Boswell : The contracts of employment of staff automatically transfer from the local education authority to the governing body of a grant-maintained school, which is required to observe all aspects of employment law. Staff at grant-maintained schools have the same rights as other employees to take their case to an industrial tribunal or to the courts.
Mr. Pope : Does the Minister accept that there is a legal obligation on GM schools not only to accept the terms and conditions that exist for teaching and non-teaching staff but to maintain the union recognition agreement when there is evidence--and I have evidence--that conditions of service for teaching and non-teaching staff in GM schools are worsening? Can he give an assurance to the House, which he would not give to the Standing Committee, that the Minister has not only the power but the political will to intervene?
Mr. Boswell : The hon. Gentleman is referring to the acquired rights directive which is under consideration in another Standing Committee of the House. Whether or not the directive is enacted in our domestic legislation, it already requires that grant-maintained schools must recognise unions for the same purposes and to the same extent as they were recognised by the local education authority until such time as the agreement is amended or terminated.
Dame Angela Rumbold : Can my hon. Friend advise my local authority, the teachers who work therein and those people in schools who are considering going grant maintained what protection there is for teachers who wish to participate in, or at least give their assent to, becoming grant maintained against the local authority that indicates that they may be acting contrary to its wishes?
Mr. Boswell : I had the opportunity to attend a college in Surrey yesterday, and I know of the good reputation that my right hon. Friend's local education authority generally holds. I emphasise, however, that in the Education Bill, which is currently under consideration, we have taken steps to ensure that obstruction and interference by the local authority-- whether Surrey or elsewhere--as they may bear on individual teachers involved in a compaign, should be reduced to a minimum
Column 134
and, if possible, eliminated. I am sure that no hon. Member would wish to sanction or condone such unfair and inappropriate practices.Mr. Tony Lloyd : The Minister is telling the House about unfair and inappropriate practices. He must be aware--the Standing Committee considering the Education Bill has certainly been made aware--that grant- maintained schools have already sacked teachers and altered their contracts of employment, refusing, for example, to recognise length and continuity of service or to allow maternity and other benefits to be properly enjoyed. Is it the Government's intention that grant-maintained schools should erode the employment conditions of teachers to save money? If, as the Minister implies, the answer to that is no, will he take steps to prevent grant- maintained schools from doing that?
Mr. Boswell : The purpose of the discussion in the Standing Committee was to consider the effect of the acquired rights directive on conditions of transfer. If the hon. Gentleman is inviting me to say that no grant-maintained school may ever dismiss a teacher, I must remind him that, under the local management of schools arrangements, the governors of schools within the maintained sector already have the power to hire and fire, and I know of at least one locally managed school where two teachers have been dismissed through redundancy. There is no essential difference between the two sectors in that respect.
Mr. Harry Greenway : Does my hon. Friend agree that, with children queuing up to get into grant-maintained schools and with strong community and parental support for them, the morale of teachers in such schools is unprecedentedly high?
Mr. Boswell : As ever, my hon. Friend is exactly on the point. The survey recently conducted by Grant-Maintained Schools Ltd. shows a positive side on employment practices as well as on the delivery of education. My hon. Friend is right : staffing levels are generally better and staff turnover is very much lower than in the equivalent maintained schools.
Teaching Practice
9. Mr. Mike O'Brien : To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on his Department's policy and role in respect of instructing teachers (a) what to teach and (b) how to teach it.
Mr. Patten : I have recently brought to schools' attention advice from the Office for Standards in Education--the inspectorate--and the National Curriculum Council on strategies for improving curricular organisation and classroom practice.
Mr. O'Brien : Is not there a real danger that the Secretary of State will become too involved in the way in which things are done in the classroom and too prescriptive and rigid about the way in which teachers teach? Should not we trust teachers, governors and heads to decide how teaching should be done in the classroom, rather than the state being involved in every single decision?
Mr. Patten : I agree with some of what the hon. Gentleman says. There is a wide spectrum of opinion
Column 135
among those interested in education--from right to left and from traditional to progressive--that regulation should not be too prescriptive and that there should not be too much interference in what happens in the classroom. Nevertheless, the National Curriculum Council and the inspectorate made individual reports to me at the same time saying that they felt that a number of practices that had largely been dropped in primary schools in the 1960s and early 1970s, such as setting and whole-class teaching, were practices from which children should benefit. It was important to draw the conclusions of those two bodies to teachers' attention.Mr. Anthony Coombs : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is pure common sense, as the National Curriculum Council and OFSTED said in their reports last week, that primary teachers should do more whole-class teaching, that they should have an idea of exactly the curriculum that they are meant to be teaching and that it is not in any way ideological to set or stream pupils according to their ability? Does not the fact that the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor), the Opposition spokesman, calls those common sense remarks "fanatical doctrine" show the extent to which she is out of touch with parental opinion in Britain?
Mr. Patten : I cannot improve on what my hon. Friend has said about the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor). It is very important that when parents make up their minds about the school to which they wish their children to go, they know not only what the examination results are and something of the ethos of the school, as well as how religion is taught and what sports are available, but what teaching styles are used in the classroom. I am sure that parents have a right to such knowledge. They have a right to know whether setting is used and whether there is whole-class teaching. I intend to make certain that in their prospectuses for next year all schools will be required to give an accurate description not only of what they teach but of how they teach.
Mr. Don Foster : Does the Secretary of State accept that his Department, in addition to having a policy about instructing teachers, should have a policy of listening to teachers? Can he give us any evidence that his Department is doing that?
Mr. Patten : There is a range of evidence from my meetings with teachers, parents and governors during more than 75 visits to schools since last April. Week after week after week, individuals and groups of teachers come to see me and my ministerial colleagues to discuss just these issues.
Grant-maintained Schools
10. Mr. Pawsey : To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many teachers are now employed in grant-maintained schools ; and how many children are educated in such schools.
Mr. Patten : It is estimated that some 14,000 qualified teachers were teaching more than 236,000 pupils in January 1992 in schools in England that are currently grant maintained.
Column 136
Mr. Pawsey : These are indeed impressive figures, which underline the success and the importance of grant-maintained schools. Can my right hon. Friend speculate about what the reaction of teachers and parents will be when they discover that the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) has said that if the Labour party were elected to government they would abolish grant-maintained schools?
Mr. Patten : When I left the Department to come to the House today there were 622 yes votes for grant-maintained status. We are well on target towards the projected 1,500 by 1 April 1994. I can only imagine the despair in the hearts of teachers, governors, parents and others connected with the growing number of grant-maintained schools at the pledge of the hon. Lady-- a pledge now on the record, including television--that if she ever gets into power she will abolish all grant-maintained schools straight away.
Mr. Steinberg : May I inform the Secretary of State that I am the consultant to the National Union of Teachers--and proud of it. Now that the policy of having an avalanche of schools opting out has failed, do the Government intend to force schools into
grant-maintained status?
| Next Section
| Home Page |