| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Gerald Howarth (Aldershot): Is it not true that the money available in the first year from the abolition of assisted places will amount to something like £49 million? The Government cannot deliver on their undertaking. Are they not in fact promoting a deceit on the British people by saying that class sizes will be reduced but without specifying where the money will come from? The abolition of assisted places will not provide it.
Mr. Blunkett: I am very happy to enlighten the hon. Gentleman, as I was during the general election campaign. I was delighted that the British people believed a party of honesty rather than a party of gross dishonesty.
By the year 2000, £100 million will have been freed from the assisted places scheme, partly because some youngsters will come off the scheme as they leave school and partly because new money will not be applied to the scheme from next year but will instead be used to aid pupils in state schools.
Perhaps I can remind the hon. Gentleman of the legacy of the previous Government. Over the past 15 years, there has been a 40 per cent. increase in the number of children in primary education taught in classes of more than 30. How an Opposition Member can raise the issue of class sizes with me, a representative of the new Government, I really do not know. The increase in class sizes and the legacy of neglect will take us years to overcome, but we have been honest; we did not pretend to the electorate that we could do everything in 12 or 18 months. We set out a programme for a five-year Parliament which, the electorate and our success willing, we shall turn into a second and third Labour term to build on the foundations that we are laying so that we can rebuild the trust of the British electorate.
A reduction in class sizes is just one of our pledges, but I shall spell out in greater detail this afternoon and in the weeks to come the way in which we shall implement our key commitments to ensure that every child has the opportunity to succeed.
Mr. Eric Forth (Bromley and Chislehurst):
I join others in wishing the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues well, in the hope that they succeed in what they have set out to do.
Has the Secretary of State yet had time to ponder the rather peculiar fact that some of the local education authorities that deliver the best results in their schools have the largest class sizes; whereas many of the LEAs--mostly controlled by Labour--that produce the worst results have the smallest classes?
Mr. Blunkett:
Until 1 May, of course, the Conservative party controlled only five councils. It now
Whenever action is not taken, whatever the complexion of the local authority, we shall act to ensure that the children in question are not denied a decent education. I just wish that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) had acted decisively when, as a Minister, he had the chance to do so.
Mr. Blunkett:
I give way to the hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes).
Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray):
On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I hesitate to raise it during the speech of the Secretary of State, for whom I have the highest regard, but it relates to the business of the House.
As you know, Madam Speaker, the Referendums (Scotland and Wales) Bill was to be published today; it is of great interest to Scottish and Welsh Members. It appears that the Bill was circulating among members of the Welsh press by 12 noon today, yet when I made representations at the Vote Office 10 minutes ago it was not readily available to Members. Does not that show contempt for the rights of hon. Members?
Madam Speaker:
I shall of course have the matter looked at right away. The House is grateful to the hon. Lady for raising it.
Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey):
Will the Secretary of State consider one other method of improving equality of access, consistent with what he has said about the abolition of assisted places? There are many good schools, but it is often difficult to get into them. They all have to be applied for separately. Schools in metropolitan areas, for instance, would certainly benefit from a co-ordinated application system at primary and secondary level rather like the system operating for universities and colleges.
Will the Secretary of State review that matter, including the Greenwich judgment, so that access to schools and quality of teaching can be approached by the Government with a fresh mind, with a view to dealing with some of the injustices and frustrations caused by the current system?
Mr. Blunkett:
For the avoidance of misunderstanding: I believe it unlikely that there will be a change in the Greenwich judgment. The system of children crossing local authority boundaries has become established as part of parental preference, but I can undertake to review the admissions system and the co-ordination that is required. Proposals will be made in the White Paper and consultation will take place on it, so that we can make some sense of what, in certain parts of the country--Bromley,
I was going to give way next to my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, South--
Mr. John Gunnell (Morley and Rothwell):
I congratulate my right hon. Friend--but I must tell him that I am no longer the Member for Leeds, South. I have been translated to Morley and Rothwell, which does include parts of Leeds, South.
The former Minister, the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth), used to make it clear in Committee and in the House that the Government rejected the idea that class size bears any relation to performance. Does my right hon. Friend's experience bear out mine? When I met parents outside schools during the campaign I found that nothing was more important to them than our promises on class size. They knew very well that their children were losing out because they were in classes of more than 30. We shall need time to put that right, but the electorate found our commitment on the issue very important.
Mr. Blunkett:
I am grateful for that comment. Perhaps my hon. Friend will forgive me for getting the name of his constituency wrong. I am struggling with 200 or so new voices to get used to as well, so we may have a little difficulty on that front for a month or two.
My hon. Friend is right to point out that the issue of class sizes is raised in every school that we visit. Everyone, including those involved in private education, acknowledges that class size matters for delivering the basics. We shall face and overcome the Conservative Government's legacy of 45 per cent. of our youngsters aged 11 being unable to deal with maths adequately and more than 40 per cent. of them not being able to deal with reading and writing at an adequate level. It is crucial that we set targets and work with teachers on methodology. We must have class sizes that make it possible for us to deliver to those young children so that we can do the job satisfactorily.
Mrs. Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham):
May I add my congratulations to the right hon. Gentleman? I hope that he achieves everything that he has set out in his manifesto. Will he confirm that only a few weeks before the general election he allowed the new assisted places to go ahead from 1 September? Will he also confirm that those places will go ahead from that date and tell us how long they will last? Presumably they will last for at least the next six years.
Mr. Blunkett:
I am delighted to say that Cheltenham Ladies' college is now in a Labour constituency--or was it Roedean that the hon. Lady attended?
Mrs. Gillan:
Cheltenham Ladies' college.
Mr. Blunkett:
That is actually in a Liberal Democrat constituency.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |