---

Column 1083

greatest nationally. By comparison, Staffordshire is ranked 32nd, with an average point score of 15.7, which is below the national average of 16.7.

I would not wish to imply, and I know that my hon. Friend would not assume it from my comments, that in some way uniquely Staffordshire should be linked with Stockport. My purpose in linking the two LEAs was to draw specific and complete attention to the erroneous belief, fostered especially on the Opposition Benches, that there is a direct correlation between money spent and education results achieved. My hon. Friend made passing reference to Stoke, which I recognise will shortly be in transit from the warm embrace of Staffordshire. He might concede, although I do not seek that he should do so tonight, that Stoke-on-Trent is a region of significant social and economic deprivation. For many years, Governments have sought to encourage authorities to give priority to deprived regions in determining their priorities for expansion of nursery provision. I can confirm that the level of nursery provision in Staffordshire does not affect its SSA--the SSAs are calculated on the basis of pupil numbers, not nursery provision.

I shall now discuss the local management of schools in Staffordshire. As hon. Members will know, local education authorities have a great deal of discretion in the way in which they arrange their LMS schemes. It is important to realise what LMS is about. It is not about the total spending on schools. It is about the distribution of that expenditure--the balance between centrally retained items and funds delegated to schools, and the distribution of those delegated funds between individual schools.

I suspect that there is not an hon. Member in the House who has not received letters from this or that school whose complaint, when analysed, is against the nature of the local LMS scheme administered by the education authority, rather than exclusively, as the writer thought when he wrote the letter, against the nature of this or that Government decision. I have received many such letters.

How much Staffordshire spends on its schools is a decision for the LEA, to be taken in the light of its other commitments, both in education and in other services. This year, Staffordshire's general schools budget amounted to £342 million, equal to £2,124 per pupil. National comparisons are not yet available for 1995-96, but it is true that in 1994-95 the general schools budget per pupil for Staffordshire, which then stood at £2,120, was the lowest of any shire LEA, and one of the lowest in the country.

---

Column 1084

However, hon. Members should be wary of those comparisons. The size of the general school budget per pupil is affected by many factors, such as the proportion of sixth formers in LEA schools and the capital spending needs of local authorities.

Another matter of acute interest to schools is the proportion of funding delegated to them. In 1995-96, Staffordshire will be delegating to schools 92.8 per cent. of its potential schools budget, which, on the information currently available to me, is a little above the national average and ahead of the required minimum of 85 per cent.

What does that delegation represent in terms of budget share per pupil? Obviously, that varies from school to school; all LMS schemes direct funding between schools according to various factors which measure perceived need, which can result in marked differences in funding per pupil. On average, the budget share per pupil this year is £1,286 for primary pupils, £1,768 for secondary pupils and £6,267 for special schools. All those show a modest increase compared with 1994-95.

I mentioned at the outset that I thought that my hon. Friend had done a first-class job. It is particularly relevant that his debate takes place in what, in many parts of the country, is the run-up to local elections. I am sure that in Staffordshire, as across the country, he and his supporters are finding that Conservative councils use their resources efficiently.

Too often, when one analyses their spending, Labour or Labour-Liberal Democrat or Liberal Democrat councils use their money inefficiently. Sometimes, they have strange sets of priorities. As Education Minister, I shall, of course, continue to reiterate the importance of education. In saying that, I am backed by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, who has stated many times the importance that he attaches to education. We expect to see that priority represented and reflected across the country in the decisions of local authorities.

This has been a wide-ranging and interesting debate, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising so many important issues. I very much hope and trust that, with the information that I have given him tonight, he will be able to return to his constituents and explain even more clearly than the brilliant way in which he has already, the reasons why Staffordshire may be under-performing in education terms. He can explain to them that it is up to the LEA and the governing bodies to address those problems rather than to assume that it is simply a matter for greater funding from the centre at the expense of the taxpayer, year in and year out.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-nine minutes past Ten o'clock.

---

Column 1083

---