| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
School Standards
10. Helen Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what role he plans to give to local education authorities in supporting schools to raise standards. [8605]
12. Mr. Lock:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proposals he has for the role local education authorities should have in supporting schools to raise standards. [8607]
Mr. Blunkett:
The White Paper "Excellence in schools", published on 7 July, sets out the key task of self-improvement within schools, but supported by the local authority with advice and the spread of best practice. The provision of a development plan worked out with the schools which will be submitted to the Department will deal with the way in which, by collaboration rather than conflict, we can ensure that each plays its part in raising standards for the future.
Helen Jackson:
I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. I am sure that he will agree that the Tory years of cuts have left many classrooms poorly equipped with new technology and with scruffy and inadequate books and library areas. In poorer areas particularly, parents do not have, and cannot afford, the top-up necessary to help in that regard.
In their support role, will local education authorities also be given a monitoring role on that bread-and-butter side of education standards in schools? When the Government start their regular inspection of LEAs, will they ensure that it covers the bricks, mortar, books and wherewithal of teaching, as well as the standard of teaching itself?
Mr. Blunkett:
I assure my hon. Friend that the inspection will cover the availability of the equipment, books and material that are so crucial to raising standards and enabling teachers to do their job. My Department
Mr. Lock:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the most important areas of co-operation between local education authorities and schools is that of special educational needs? Is he aware that in my constituency of Wyre Forest there is good co-operation between schools and the LEA?
I welcome the statement in the White Paper that resources will be switched from the bureaucratic requirement to obtain a statement into proper and effective help for those children with special educational needs. May the House have further details on how that switch of resources to provide effective help will be achieved? Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that those who work in the important area of special educational needs are central to the Government's crusade to raise standards? They are not working at the periphery of an elitist educational system which benefits only the few.
Mr. Blunkett:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising an important and often neglected area in the education system. In the autumn, we will publish a Green Paper so that we can develop consultation with schools, special needs co-ordinators and parents on the best way to ensure that we place resources at the right level and at the right time for intervention to be most effective. We want to overcome, where that is possible, the special needs of the youngsters and to reinforce the work already taking place in our schools. It is time that we placed as much emphasis on those with special educational needs as we place on the small elite group who, with our help, continue to flourish in our education system.
Mr. Bercow:
Does the right hon. Gentleman believe that requiring the star-performing London Oratory to submit an annual improvement plan to the poor-performing Hammersmith and Fulham education authority will contribute to improving standards in that school?
Mr. Blunkett:
I want to make it clear that, over recent times, Hammersmith and Fulham education authority has been doing an excellent job in supporting and raising standards in its area, including at the Phoenix school, which is a classic example of how a fresh start can give a school the opportunity to offer, to the children who inevitably attend it, the sort of education which, regrettably, Conservative Members seem to think can and should be available only to a very few.
I also want to make it clear that there is room for improvement in every school in this country. We agree with the Office for Standards in Education that the average should be increased to the excellent and the excellent should be striving for even greater excellence for the sake of the children in those schools.
Mr. Dorrell:
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is an increasing belief that his White Paper on schools was simply a series of pious aspirations? Why did he decide to publish his White Paper, but delay until later in the year publication of the detail of his proposals for
Mr. Blunkett:
A representative of the previous Conservative Government talking about stages, levels and timing of consultation really takes the biscuit. The right hon. Gentleman sheds tears about people who are on holiday and therefore not available for consultation. He would do better to examine what the White Paper is all about--standards and excellence in schools; concentrating on the future, not the past; and a new agenda uniting all those who want to move away from past conflict and division. That is why, in consulting on any further changes, we will ensure that we work with the grain and consensus. I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman not to be so griping and sour in everything that he says and does.
Mr. Skinner:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that, when standards have been raised, especially in the working-class base where they need to be raised, and when literacy and numeracy have been improved, as an earlier answer suggested they would be, more and more young people will want to go to university? Until yesterday, one feature that distinguished us from the Tories was our stance on tuition fees and similar issues. There seemed to be a blurring of the edges yesterday. May I ask my right hon. Friend, as modestly and quietly as I can, to take sufficient time before the publication of the White Paper and the introduction of the Bill to listen to the many voices from the Labour Benches about financing? Can he assure us that we have not heard the last word yet?
Mr. Blunkett:
As quietly and gently as I can, I tell my hon. Friend that there will never be a last word on any subject with him in the Chamber. I assure him that we shall listen and respond. We shall lift the cap on access to higher education that the previous Government brought in. We shall ensure quality and standards for those for whom education will be available because of the new access when it would not have been available had we not found an alternative income stream. We shall ensure that those from families earning more than £35,000 a year, who will not receive help with the payment of fees, will be supported in fulfilling the expectations and aspirations that will no doubt come from their parents, given the level of income that they are drawing on.
11. Mr. Ian Bruce:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what measures he proposes to take to ensure money that saved from the abolition of the assisted places schemes is ring-fenced to reduce class sizes of five, six and seven-year-olds. [8606]
Mr. Byers:
We intend to channel funds to local education authorities through specific grant to ensure that resources are dedicated to delivering on our pledge to reduce class sizes.
Mr. Bruce:
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for explaining that, but he has not clarified the issue of ring-fencing. My education authority in Dorset is controlled by the Liberal Democrats, not the Labour party. County councillors have the right to decide how to spend that money. The Government have made a pledge to reduce class sizes. How will they fulfil that manifesto pledge without ring-fencing the money and telling county councils that they can spend it only on reducing those class sizes?
Mr. Byers:
I apologise for not addressing that clearly enough in my original reply. I said that we would channel the funds through specific grant, which is a technical way of saying that the money will be ring-fenced. The money can be used only to reduce class sizes for five, six and seven-year-olds. We make no apology for that requirement. We made that pledge to the British electorate during the campaign, and we intend to honour it in government.
Valerie Davey:
Will the Minister join me in deprecating the comment of the Conservative candidate in Uxbridge, who, when told that one in five children in the area were in classes of more than 30, claimed that it had no direct bearing on Uxbridge?
Mr. Byers:
I join my hon. Friend in condemning the Conservative candidate in Uxbridge, who is clearly prepared to turn his back on the needs of five, six and seven-year-olds in that constituency. There is no doubt in my mind that, after the by-election next Thursday, I shall be able to work with my colleague Andrew Slaughter to ensure that we can deliver on the class size pledge to those young children in Uxbridge, where one in five are presently in classes of more than 30. We shall deliver on that pledge in Uxbridge and in the rest of the country.
Mrs. Browning:
Last Friday morning, the Minister promised a technical consultation to work out how the Government's pledge of classes of a maximum of 30 could be put into practice in small Victorian primary schools in rural areas that teach across an age range. Will he promise that a cost assessment will accompany that consultation? If the practicalities of how the pledge will be delivered in rural areas have yet to be worked out, there will clearly be attendant costs that the Minister has not taken into account.
Mr. Byers:
The Government have made it clear that we shall honour the pledge that we gave to the electorate during the election campaign. The hon. Lady is right. Within a matter of weeks, we shall issue our consultation paper, which will show how we intend to honour the commitments made in the White Paper. That consultation document will address the issues the hon. Lady raised last Friday and again today.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |