| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Local Education Authorities
7. Mr. David Kidney (Stafford): What assessment he has made of the effect on quality of education provided of variations in the level of Government funding to local education authorities. [99346]
The Minister for School Standards (Ms Estelle Morris): The Government accept that there are valid objections to the variations in the level of Government funding to local education authorities. That is why we are engaged on a fundamental review of this issue and hope to make proposals for changes in due course.
Mr. Kidney: My understanding of the provisional education standard spending assessment settlement for next year is that per pupil the best funded schools will be getting richer at a faster rate than the worst funded schools. Is there an educational justification for widening the gap between the best and worst funded schools?
Ms Morris: No, there is not, which is exactly why we are setting about changing the SSAs. During the period while the SSAs are as they are, the difference in funding to local authorities will reflect changes in demography, the number of children in local authorities and whether they are in the primary or secondary sectors.
I know how strongly my hon. Friend's constituents feel about this matter and I am aware of how much he has done to represent their interests in presenting the case to myself and to my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State and the Deputy Prime Minister. I assure my hon. Friend
that we shall move as quickly as we can. Meanwhile, we shall ensure that the other way in which funds are routed into Staffordshire means that his constituents' children will get their fair share of the increased resources. I know that my hon. Friend and many other hon Members will not be satisfied until we change the formula. For all the reasons that I have outlined, it will take one or two more years.
Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire):
The Minister said a few moments ago that she is proud that the Government took instant action on something that they thought was unfair. Can she understand the frustration when local authorities hear her say that she is seeking consensus? If she is looking for consensus on this matter, she will be looking for a long time. The statement that she has just made--I do not know whether it was a slip or whether it was deliberate--is quite worrying. I believe that the Minister said that she would ensure through other ways that pupils in Staffordshire would get a fair deal. Can that apply also to pupils in Leicestershire and Derbyshire? If she is using a secret formula, can we all know about it, please?
Ms Morris:
The hon. Gentleman fails to understand that SSAs are only one way of routing money to schools. We are increasingly putting more money through the standards fund, and £1.6 billion went through it this year. The assurance that I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) is one that I am happy to give to the hon. Gentleman. The extra money that will be distributed will not be under the SSA formula. Schools will not lose out because that is their formula for adjustment. It is not a secret formula but an open one to ensure that the extra money that we are putting into schools through the standards fund means that everyone can benefit.
The hon. Gentleman must realise that under this Government we have seen an increase in funding over the past two years of £200 per pupil, compared with a drop in funding for primary pupils of £30 and one of £80 for secondary age students under the Conservative Government. We shall change the formula in due course. Meanwhile, every school in the hon. Gentleman's constituency is getting more money through both the SSA and the standards fund than they did at any time during the years of the previous Government.
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire):
Is it not at least welcome to hear Conservatives now claiming that class sizes have some significance in the quality of education, when for many years they denied that that was the case? Is my hon. Friend aware that shortly after I and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State entered Parliament, I asked the then Prime Minister, Lady Thatcher, if she would compliment Derbyshire county council on having the smallest class sizes in the country? It was the Local Government Act 1988 and the introduction of standard spending assessments that destroyed those class sizes and made them among the largest in the country.
In Derbyshire, we are very pleased with the moves on funding that have been made by the Department for Education and Employment. However, our problem is with the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions and with the standard spending assessment.
It has not been adjusted, and we shall have to wait a long time before alterations are made in new legislation that will finally get rid of existing measures. Does a brick wall exist between the DFEE and DETR?
Ms Morris:
No brick wall exists between those Departments or any other Departments in Whitehall. I am sure that my hon. Friend will lobby DETR as much as he lobbies the DFEE, and I wish him well if he does. I am delighted that Derbyshire has made such good progress on class sizes. We were very pleased that in the first year that we delivered the pledge on class sizes--if my memory serves me well--Derbyshire received more money to deliver smaller classes than any other local authority. I think that it received £1 million in the first year and it received at least as much, if not more, in the second year. I am so pleased that infant children in my hon. Friend's constituency will now start their schooling in classes of 30 or fewer, giving them a real chance to get a firm foundation. I wish them well, and I wish the local authority well in delivering the rest of the class size pledge.
8. Mr. Graham Brady (Altrincham and Sale, West):
How many (a) challenges and (b) queries he has received regarding grammar school petitions. [99348]
The Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mr. David Blunkett):
Since consultation began on the grammar school ballot regulations arising out of the White Paper "Excellence in Schools" in July 1997, we have received 2,300 queries regarding the grammar school petition and ballot process, 16 of which have been complaints about campaigning material in areas where petitions are currently being circulated.
Mr. Brady:
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for that response. He will recall that, during the passage of the Schools Standards and Framework Act 1998, Ministers were keen to stress that it would be a breach of the regulations for local authorities, schools or governing bodies to publish information or express views that were intended to influence parents during the ballot process.
Nearly two months ago, I wrote to the Secretary of State highlighting a very clear breach by the head of Trinity school in Hulme. There has still been no concrete action taken to uphold the Government's own regulations. That is now resulting in the process in the borough of Trafford descending into farce. The so-called cabinet member for education in Trafford, Councillor Peter Mitchell, has expressed the view publicly in the local press that the 11-plus is resulting in "social selection" and "economic apartheid" in our schools. When will the Secretary of State enforce his own regulations and ensure that there is a fair contest?
Mr. Blunkett:
As the hon. Gentleman knows, because he has asked eight oral questions on this issue, we are taking decisive action. We are investigating the complaint about that school, as we did the complaint relating to the material put out by Urmston grammar school. That complaint was resolved this week by taking action to ensure that that material was withdrawn as it was inadequate and inappropriate and broke the regulations.
Mr. Bill Rammell (Harlow):
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that there are very fair procedures in place to ensure that parents decide such issues in local ballots? Does he agree that the Conservative party's obsession with this issue, which affects a small percentage of children in the country, is very revealing and shows that it is still concerned with that minority agenda instead of with raising standards for every child in every school in every part of the country?
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham):
I am afraid that the right hon. Gentleman's reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale, West (Mr. Brady) was grossly unsatisfactory and exudes the sort of complacency for which the right hon. Gentleman has fast become renowned. Given the extraordinary behaviour of the head teacher of Trinity Church of England school in Hulme, Manchester, Mr. Michael Evans, in sending out anti- grammar school propaganda to Trafford parents, and the further abuse, which was rightly highlighted by my hon. Friend, of Labour councillor, Peter Mitchell, in indulging in ludicrous hyperbole that accused grammar schools of being responsible for economic apartheid in that area, will the right hon. Gentleman now stop dithering and use the powers available to him under sub-paragraph (e) of paragraph 15 on page 10, lines 8 to 11, of the Education (Grammar Schools Ballots) Regulations 1998 to declare that this year the petition process in Trafford is null and void? Does not the Secretary of State understand that if he will not do so, people will rightly conclude that he is working hand in glove with left-wing educational vandals, who are plotting to destroy some of the finest state schools in the country?
Mr. Blunkett:
Knowing the particular line or paragraph of a regulation does not make one intelligent or right. Again, I make it clear to the House that when complaints are made, they will be investigated and, if they are upheld, dealt with. That will be the case for complaints from either side in the discussion about the future of selection.
The hon. Gentleman was recently quoted in the press as saying that some of my honourable colleagues in the Labour party whose children went to selective schools were exercising their right to choose such schools. I point out to him that where selection exists, parents do not have a right to choose because the pupils are chosen by an 11-plus examination that excludes 75 to 80 per cent. of the children and their parents from any right of entry to those excellent schools.
Dr. Phyllis Starkey (Milton Keynes, South-West):
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that once a ballot has taken place, he will expect the results to be complied with? Is that not in contrast to the behaviour of Conservative-controlled Buckinghamshire county council, which under the previous Conservative Government three
Mr. Blunkett:
That is why the artificial indignation of Conservative Members takes the biscuit, because they will do one thing to protect their own and quite another to protect the rest of the population.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |