| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Jobseeker's Allowance
2. Mr. Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what monitoring of the operation of the jobseeker's allowance that she is undertaking. [11726]
The Minister of State, Department for Education and Employment (Mr. Eric Forth): The Employment Service and the Benefits Agency are carrying out continuous monitoring of the operation of jobseeker's allowance and produce regular joint reports to the Secretaries of State for Education and Employment and for Social Security.
Mr. Corbyn: Will the Minister confirm that £10.7 million has already been spent on consultants to introduce the jobseeker's allowance? Can he tell us how much more is to be spent on consultancy fees in the future? From his monitoring of the operation of the jobseeker's allowance, can he tell us how many people have been denied all benefits as a result of failing jobseeker's allowance interviews? What monitoring is he undertaking of the low wages that many people are forced to accept for jobs that they are forced to take because of the draconian and inhuman way in which the jobseeker's allowance operates?
Mr. Forth: The answers to the hon. Gentleman's first series of questions are: yes, no, and I do not know at this stage. The answer to his last question is that, if he can produce any evidence to back up the ridiculous overstatement and hyperbole to which he is accustomed, we will of course consider it, but I am not impressed by wild accusations of that type made across the Floor of the House of Commons. They do not help the individuals allegedly involved, or anyone else.
Children's Homework
3. Mr. Sweeney: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what recent representations she has received regarding arrangements for children's homework. [11727]
The Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mrs. Gillian Shephard): I have received a number of representations on homework from various bodies and members of the public.
Mr. Sweeney: Does my right hon. Friend agree that if--heaven forbid--we end up with a Labour Government and a Welsh Assembly, we would be placed in a ludicrous situation in which Members of Parliament from Wales will be able to vote in Westminster on issues such as homework while Members of Parliament in England will have no say on education matters in Wales? Does my right hon. Friend agree that that would be a ludicrous result and gives every indication of why we need to reject the concept of a Welsh Assembly and of a Labour Government?
Mrs. Shephard: I thank my hon. Friend for his ingenious question. I am sure that the distressing situation that he describes will not arise. Conservative Members believe that it is quite clear that the most effective way to
29 Jan 1997 : Column 343
encourage good practice on homework, whether in England, Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland, is to disseminate guidance based on research and practical experience.
Ms Estelle Morris: At least there seems to be some agreement that homework raises standards, but why do not the Government show some leadership in ensuring that all children can benefit from it? Does the Secretary of State not understand that the very half-hearted initiative that she announced recently, which will not benefit all children, is wrong, and that she should support Labour's policy of minimum homework targets and a national network of homework centres to support those children who have home backgrounds where homework is difficult?
Mrs. Shephard: It is neither necessary nor--perhaps more importantly--practical for the Government to introduce a legal framework to govern homework arrangements in all our 25,000 schools. The important thing is to disseminate good practice and guidance so that schools fully understand that it is in their interests and those of their pupils to have sensible homework policies.
It is perhaps typical of the Labour party that the right hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) says that he supports an approach whereby the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) would be given the task of checking that all the nation's 7 million pupils had done their homework, followed no doubt by his hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw), who would tuck them up in bed.
Mr. Pawsey:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that, although homework is important, what counts is what is taught and the methodology that is used in schools? Does she agree that we have shown leadership in education, but all the education reforms that we have introduced have been opposed by Opposition Members, both Labour and Liberal Democrat?
Mrs. Shephard:
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. A very important difference between our policies and practice and those of the Opposition is that we have consistently concentrated on measures to raise standards by means of inspections, performance tables, tests and the national curriculum. The Labour party, which actually voted against the setting up of the Office for Standards in Education, is less than convincing when it proposes homework by law.
4. Mr. Alan W. Williams:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment how many representations she has received (a) in support and (b) against the Government's proposed changes to the teachers' early retirement scheme. [11728]
Mrs. Gillan:
My right hon. Friend has so far received 36 written representations from consultees on the Government's proposed changes to the early retirement arrangements for teachers, and a large number of individual responses.
Mr. Williams:
Why do 80 to 90 per cent. of teachers want to retire early? Is that not a sad comment on the
29 Jan 1997 : Column 344
Mrs. Gillan:
No, I cannot agree with the hon. Gentleman that the handling of the matter has been inept. I would go so far as to say that there is much common ground between the Labour party and the Government on the teachers' superannuation scheme. A great deal of misinformation and dissembling has been going on, which has scared and unsettled many teachers and retired teachers.
I want to assure teachers from the Dispatch Box that we have no intention of ending the early retirement scheme, and that we are carefully examining the responses to the consultation. All those will be taken into account by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State in due course.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton:
I thank my hon. Friend for modestly extending the consultation period. May I make a plea to her for it to be extended still further, to enable meaningful discussions to go on between the Government and all the teacher unions involved, particularly the National Association of Head Teachers, which undertook a constructive and positive lobby of Parliament last week? Does my hon. Friend accept that, if she can get Treasury permission, it would be more appropriate for the new arrangements to take effect from the new academic year in September rather than from 1 April?
Mrs. Gillan:
I thank my hon. Friend for that helpful question. I reassure him that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will give careful consideration to the representations that have been made by the teachers unions, local education authorities and others, including the National Association of Head Teachers, and that she will make an announcement shortly. We shall consider all the options that have been placed before the Government.
Mr. Don Foster:
Further to that answer, why cannot the Minister give a straight answer to the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton)? Why cannot she tell him and the House that she will extend the consultation period to enable a wide range of alternative suggestions to be considered? Does she accept that, although changes to the teachers' pension scheme are needed, her Department's handling of the matter has been nothing short of a public relations disaster, and that as a result it has further reduced the morale of all those in the teaching profession?
Mrs. Gillan:
I consider a 12-week consultation period sufficient. No teachers, unions or representative bodies could believe that their representations had not been taken into account. If there are any further representations, we shall be pleased to receive them before the end of the week.
During the Committee stage of the Education Bill, I challenged the Opposition parties to make representations and to put forward their solutions to the problems with the teachers' superannuation scheme, but
29 Jan 1997 : Column 345
Mr. Nicholls:
Does my hon. Friend agree that that is only part of the wider issue of teacher morale? Has she shared my experience that many teachers in the state sector believe genuinely, albeit wrongly, that the Government do not value their work? Will my hon. Friend take this opportunity to say that her experience is the same as mine--that teachers in the maintained sector in my constituency are overwhelmingly first-rate professionals doing a first-rate job?
Mrs. Gillan:
I have no problem agreeing with my hon. Friend's remarks. I draw the attention of all hon. Members to an article by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State that appeared in The Times Educational Supplement last week, in which she stated:
Mr. Kilfoyle:
May we now put to the Minister the questions that we asked in Committee, in the hope that perhaps today she will answer the most relevant one? Will she confirm that the Government have done a deal with local authorities to enable them to claw back the costs of early retirement from individual schools? Will she also confirm that on 18 December last the Funding Agency for Schools wrote to grant-maintained schools offering quite a generous settlement of 100 per cent. of retirement costs? Will she further confirm that the Government have a twin-track approach--one that is preferential to the grant-maintained sector and another for the rest of the teaching profession who are members of the teachers' superannuation scheme?
Mrs. Gillan:
I shall not allow the issue of teachers' pensions to become an attack on grant-maintained schools. There is no doubt that the Opposition parties would abolish grant-maintained schools. How would that help the morale of teachers in those schools? The hon. Gentleman knows that it is untrue to claim that GM schools are receiving preferential treatment. The Funding Agency for Schools will support some premature retirements and the local authority settlement allows for a continuing programme of retirements at 75 per cent. of current levels. There is no reason why local education authorities should not continue to offer premature retirements under the proposals.
Mr. Harry Greenway:
Will my hon. Friend confirm that her Department has received a large number of representations on this question and that it would therefore not be unreasonable to extend the consultation period somewhat? In light of the sheer volume of
29 Jan 1997 : Column 346
Mrs. Gillan:
My hon. Friend is right to say that the Department has received a large number of representations, and I have signed more than 1,000 letters to constituents. However, I believe that a consultation period of 12 weeks and the courtesy that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has extended to organisations to come to see her and me is sufficient. I assure my hon. Friend that the points reasonably made during the consultation period will be taken into account.
"The whole country owes a great deal to teachers. Teachers are highly skilled; they are dedicated; they work very hard. The improvement in pupils' achievement, and hence the increase in the skills of the population, could not have been achieved without the help of teachers."
No matter how often Ministers make such comments, the press never report them. We have never criticised the teachers and we seize every opportunity, from the Dispatch Box and from other platforms, to praise their skills and dedication.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |