| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Anti-smoking Programmes
7. Mr. Paul Flynn (Newport, West): If he will assess the impact of anti-smoking programmes in schools in the past 10 years. [138363]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Jacqui Smith): My Department and the Department of Health have funded a wide range of educational materials for schools on the dangers of smoking. The latest Office for National Statistics survey, entitled "Drug Use, Smoking and Drinking Among Young Teenagers in 1999", showed that regular smoking in the 11-15 age group has decreased since 1996 from 13 per cent. to 9 per cent.
Mr. Flynn: Unfortunately, that is not the answer to my question. Has the Minister noticed that the smokebusters campaign--which was well studied, conducted over four years and intended to decrease smoking among young people--coincided with the largest ever increase in smoking among young women, presumably because of the belief that smoking aids slimming? She referred not to the past 10 years, but only to the recent decrease, which has been explained by the fact that young people are spending more money on mobile phones. We all want to achieve a decrease in addiction and the harm caused by all drugs, legal and illegal, but before we embark on more expensive anti-drug education campaigns, would not it be reasonable to make a real assessment of the effect of such campaigns and of peer pressure and fashion?
Jacqui Smith: I agree with my hon. Friend that it is important to evaluate provision. Although I do not take a defeatist attitude to what our schools are able to achieve in educating young people, which he sometimes does in this respect, I agree that research is important. That is why the Department has agreed to commission a long-term study--a longitudinal study--to consider the impact of drug education policies in our schools. [Interruption.] There is a murmur from Conservative Members. We are commissioning the study because one was not commissioned by the previous Government.
The objectives of the study are to examine the effects of drug education from primary school age through transition to secondary school; to assess knowledge, attitudes and behaviour to age 16; and to investigate the effectiveness of drug education. I also agree with my hon. Friend that a range of issues may influence smoking activity among young people. We put smoking education in a framework for personal, social and health education, which allows schools and pupils to investigate the range of pressures on young people and how they can avoid those pressures. That is very important for achieving further success in this area.
FE Lecturers (Pay)
8. Sandra Gidley (Romsey): What plans he has to increase rates of pay for lecturers in further education. [138364]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mr. Malcolm Wicks): The Government have made an additional £50 million available for further education teachers' pay in 2001-02, in order to improve students' learning through the recruitment, retention and reward of high calibre staff. Representatives of employers and staff are working in consultation with officials from my Department on detailed proposals for the new arrangements. Subject to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State being satisfied that the detailed arrangements proposed will achieve the Government's objectives, we will make available £100 million in 2002-03 and further increased sums in later years.
Sandra Gidley: We welcome the money, but will the Minister confirm that it will be used to address the problem that a lecturer starting in further education currently earns less than schoolteachers at the beginning of their career? Will the Minister also investigate the increasing move to short-term contracts, whereby agreed pay scales do not have to be adhered to?
Mr. Wicks: The extra money is an indication of our good faith. Yes, we do look at comparisons with the school sector, as do those in the further education and sixth-form college sector. That is one of the reasons why we are acting firmly on the matter. We are not merely making available an extra £50 million and further sums in later years; the Government have made a record investment in further education, which will help to enhance the pay and conditions of important staff in those colleges. We are extremely concerned that the employment of agency staff should not be used by colleges to undermine proper employment rights. We are watching that carefully.
Mr. Huw Edwards (Monmouth): I welcome the additional resources that my hon. Friend mentioned. Does he agree that, especially in further education, there is an over-reliance on part-time staff, who are often paid on only an hourly basis for their class contact work, which does not give them fair remuneration for the amount of effort that they put into preparing their work, marking, assessment and the other contributions that they make?
Mr. Wicks: As in all sectors, we should value part-time staff and give them proper opportunities through training.
We are taking training in the sector more and more seriously. I note that inspectors have raised questions about the quality of some--not all--part-time staff. It is important that, as well as teaching on an hourly basis, staff are available to help with pastoral care, so I recognise the importance of the matter raised by my hon. Friend.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham): Approximately how many working days have been lost over the past 12 months as a result of strike action by further education lecturers? Given that lecturers' pay rates depend on the overall budget, which in turn depends on numbers, can the hon. Gentleman confirm that an institution that is unable to meet its recruitment target may find not only that it cannot increase pay, but that at least in relative terms it may be obliged to reduce it?
Mr. Wicks: We are concerned to increase the number of our citizens in further education, and we are taking a range of measures to boost numbers. The colleges that are most successful in recruitment will be properly rewarded. The number of days lost through industrial action is extremely small, but I will write to the hon. Gentleman and give him the data that we have.
SEN Budgets
9. Mr. Andrew George (St. Ives): What recent assessment he has made of LEA special educational needs budgets. [138365]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Ms Margaret Hodge): Individual authorities determine the funding arrangements for their schools, taking account of their statutory duties, including those for pupils with special educational needs. Schools do not account separately for their special educational provision but must, under the Education Act 1996, use their best endeavours to secure suitable special educational provision for any pupil with special educational needs.
Mr. George: I welcome the announcement of the long-overdue additional funds made available to schools in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, but is the Minister aware that among parents of children with special educational needs in Cornwall, there are growing fears of downward pressure on statementing, support services, and now a threat to the future of the Pencalenick special school? In view of the high levels of special educational need inclusion in Cornwall, can the Minister reassure parents that effective provision will not be jeopardised by an adverse change in the area cost adjustment?
Ms Hodge: I reassure the hon. Gentleman that there is no pressure to reduce the identification of children with special needs. Quite the reverse applies: we are identifying such children's needs earlier. That enables us to intervene appropriately to ensure that they can fulfil their potential.
With regard to the school to which the hon. Gentleman referred, I know that consultation is currently occurring on proposals about changing its intake. As he knows, that is a matter for local decision making and the local
organisation committee. Our policy in principle is that there should be choice for individual parents and inclusion by choice.
Charlotte Atkins (Staffordshire, Moorlands): Will my hon. Friend congratulate Staffordshire local education authority on its inclusion project, which seeks to identify and share best practice in order to ensure successful inclusion of special educational needs pupils into mainstream classrooms? The project is led by Caroline Coles, the head teacher of Horton Lodge school, which has become a centre of excellence and runs a groundbreaking training course for mainstream teachers. Does my hon. Friend agree that the way forward for SEN is to work in partnership with both parents and pupils, rather than through the bureaucratic paper chase of statementing used by the previous Government?
Ms Hodge: I join my hon. Friend in congratulating those involved in the project in her constituency. It is one of many that we are funding to promote and spread best practice in encouraging inclusion in schools. I agree entirely with her that the best way of ensuring that children with special educational needs fulfil their potential is by working in partnership with parents and schools to achieve that. She will be pleased to know that partnership will be at the centre of the future legislation and the code of practice that will arise out of it. Doing away with paper chases will also be part of the code of practice.
Mr. James Clappison (Hertsmere): Given that some people believe that special educational needs are more easily identified and met in smaller classes and this week's news that pupil:teacher ratios in secondary schools are now at their worst since 1975, will the Minister tell us whether class sizes are higher or lower for the important key stage 2 age group than they were in 1979?
Ms Hodge: The answer to that question is yes.
Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley): Does my hon. Friend recognise that organisations such as the National Union of Teachers in Lancashire are anxious about the way in which funding arrangements are being changed for special educational needs? Will she guarantee that provision for special educational needs will remain a major service area and will take into account the anxieties expressed by organisations such as the Lancashire NUT?
Ms Hodge: I reassure my hon. Friend that funding has been not reduced, but massively increased by the Government to meet the needs of children with special needs. The standards fund has achieved a tripling of that budget since the Government came into power and the school access initiative has ensured a tenfold increase in the schools access budget this year. Further increases are planned. By 2003-04, we will be spending £100 million on increasing access to the curriculum and to buildings.
I also assure my hon. Friend that the derogation of funding to schools will, in my view, support the interests of children with special educational needs as there will be more stable funding and greater opportunity to improve staff training.
Mr. Graham Brady (Altrincham and Sale, West): Will the Minister give an assurance that the Bill on special
educational needs that the Government will introduce in the new Session will contain nothing to dilute the individual rights of parents with regard to statementing?
Ms Hodge: I can give the hon. Gentleman a categorical assurance that that will be the case.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |