| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tom Levitt (High Peak): I congratulate the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan) on securing this Adjournment debate on such an important topic for children with the special need of hearing impairment--in which I have great interest. I do not know an awful lot about land valuation, but I know something about teaching and--as trustee of the Royal National Institute for Deaf People--a bit about deafness.
I shall speak only briefly, simply to make the point that if children--any child in any culture--are to develop language effectively, they have to grow up in an environment that is rich in that language. That is as true for a hearing child, in any language, as it is for a deaf child growing up, who is developing sign language as his or her first language--as it is for 50,000 people in the United Kingdom.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mr. Charles Clarke):
I congratulate the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan) on securing this debate. Not all hon. Members will know that she spent much of her early life in my constituency, in Cringleford, which is just outside Norwich. For some reason, she decided to depart--to Cheltenham Ladies college and to Amersham and Chesham. I do not know why she left, but I know that our loss in Norwich was their gain in Chesham and Amersham. I congratulate her on the way in which she made her case.
I very much welcome the opportunity of discussing the future of Penn school, which, judging from the correspondence that I have received, is a subject close to the hearts of many hon. Members and people elsewhere, such as parents at the school and others who are interested in the education of deaf children.
I really am grateful to all those who, in the past few months, have contributed their views on the school. The Department and I have received submissions from hon. Members representing south-east Buckinghamshire--I am glad to see the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) in the Chamber--and the hon. Members for Chesham and Amersham, for Aylesbury (Mr. Lidington), for Brent, East (Mr. Livingstone), for Hayes and Harlington (Mr. McDonnell), for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty), for Finchley and Golders Green (Dr. Vis), for Wycombe (Sir R. Whitney), for Harrow, West (Mr. Thomas), for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve), for Southwark, North and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) and Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning). From the other place, I have received representations from Earl Howe and Lord Ashley of Stoke. It is a testament to the quality of the school that so many Members of the House and of the other place should have decided that they wished to make representations in the manner that they have.
We have received representations also in a petition of 1,200 names, from the National Deaf Children's Society and from a variety of local education authorities--
which I suspect are among those that the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham said would be keen to use the school.
Mrs. Gillan:
It is quite obvious that there is tremendous support for the school, and I am glad that the Minister has catalogued the number of representations that he has received. May I also, through him, thank his officials, who I believe have visited the school several times, most recently last week? I was pleased to note that officials took such close interest in the school and in the outcome. I therefore hope that the Minister will today be giving us the response that we wish to hear.
Mr. Clarke:
I appreciate that remark, and shall certainly pass it on to officials in my Department. As the hon. Lady said, they have worked hard on the matter, and I join her in thanking them for their work.
Mr. Gareth R. Thomas (Harrow, West):
My hon. Friend has already mentioned the written representations that other hon. Members and I have made to him. May I underline the point about the considerable uncertainty facing parents--such as Mr. and Mrs. Wilson, who have a child at the school and live in my constituency--because of continued uncertainty about the school's future? An early decision to end that uncertainty would be particularly welcome for them.
Mr. Clarke:
I appreciate that point and I hope that I can help my hon. Friend during the debate.
Special educational needs is an important issue for the Government. Our Green Paper in October 1997, followed by our action programme in November 1998, set out a clear plan for dealing with the issues. We are committed to taking all possible steps to improve the situation for people with special educational needs. That is the context in which I turn to the proposal from Camden local education authority to cease to maintain the school and the school's application to become a non-maintained special school.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham on the clarity with which she made her case. Penn school is a special school in Penn in Buckinghamshire, but maintained by Camden LEA, for children with hearing impairments and communications difficulties. Most of the children also have other learning difficulties. As the hon. Lady said, it is an important regional facility for that group of children.
Camden LEA inherited the school when the Inner London education authority was abolished in 1990. The school serves a wide area, with children from a number of authorities. None of the children currently at the school is from Camden. The school received a good Ofsted report in June 1998, which was a commendation of all those working at the school and the service that it offers.
However, because of the consideration that I mentioned earlier, Camden LEA served notice on the Secretary of State on 6 October 1998 of its proposal to cease to maintain the school from the end of the current academic year. Later that month, the school applied for non-maintained special school status. Non-maintained special schools are run by charitable trusts on a non-profit
making basis. The governors of Penn school have already established the Rayners special education trust, with a view to running the school under the proposed new arrangements. We have received many letters of support for the continued existence of the school and my officials have kept in close contact with Camden LEA and Penn school throughout.
I am pleased to be able to announce that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has considered all the information available to him and has decided that he is minded to approve Camden LEA's proposal to cease to maintain the school from 31 August 1999 and the school's application to become a non-maintained special school from 1 September this year. I hope that that will allow the school to plan for its future as a non-maintained special school.
As the hon. Lady mentioned, substantial independent research has been carried out and a business plan has been developed that gives the governors of the school confidence that they will be able to develop it as they have proposed.
I said my right hon. Friend is minded to approve. Final approval will be given when the school and Camden have agreed terms and conditions for the sale of the site, which is currently being negotiated, and when the Secretary of State is satisfied that the school's sponsors have provided formal confirmation that they will provide financial security for the school for its first five years as a non-maintained special school. I understand that that is expected shortly.
Mr. John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington):
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his announcement, which will bring great relief to many of my constituents as well as to many others. When I was the chief executive of the Association of London Authorities, I was involved in the transfer of properties from ILEA to the boroughs. They were transferred largely as trusts so that they would be maintained for the benefit of London and the whole country. It behoves the Government to ensure that that concept is taken into account in the consideration of the financial arrangements between Camden and the school. The school was designed to provide educational value and service to the whole community. Any pricing of the property should be on that basis. Under the Wednesbury principles, it would be reasonable to take that into account.
Mr. Clarke:
I take that point, which was also made by the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham. I was coming to that. I cannot give any detailed comfort on that, save to say that I understand the powerful and forceful points that have been made and I shall give careful consideration to the situation to see what good offices my Department can offer to try to ensure that an agreement is reached at a reasonable level.
Mrs. Gillan:
On behalf of my constituents, the school, the governors, the parents and the children, may I thank the Minister for arriving so speedily at a "minded-to" decision tonight? He knows that this is a subject close to my heart, and one about which I feel strongly. To be able to send those with the greatest interest in the school home tonight with happiness in their hearts means a great deal. I unreservedly thank him for the decision. I note that there are some precursors to the final signing of the document,
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |