| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Alan Keen (Feltham and Heston): I was lucky to have been taken to see the 1948 Olympic games, when Herne Hill was the site for the cycle track events and Windsor Great Park for the road race. It inspired me to pursue a lifetime of active sport. Although I do not usually mention politics and sport in the same sentence, I was so inspired this morning by the shadow Secretary of State's optimism that he would be in the second term of a Tory Government in 2012 that I am going straight home to get my bike out. Whatever important position he holds in 2012, I hope that he will present me with a gold medal for the 1,000 m sprint. Let us hope that this is the last time that we mix sport and politics. Let us all work together to make sure that we win the bid and host a wonderful games.
Tessa Jowell: I thank my hon. Friend for that characteristically generous contribution.
Opposition Day[6th Allotted Day—First Part]
School Funding
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord): I should say to the House that Mr. Speaker has selected the amendment in the name of the Prime Minister. A 15-minute limit has been placed on Back-Bench speeches during this debate.
2.6 pm
Mr. Damian Green (Ashford): I beg to move,
- That this House condemns the Government's handling of the school funding crisis; regrets that the jobs of teachers, teaching assistants and other support staff have been put at risk; further regrets that these teacher redundancies, together with other cut backs imposed by the funding crisis, will have a negative impact on the education of school children; notes that Labour councils have been as badly affected as Conservative councils by the funding crisis; condemns the Government for seeking to blame local authorities for this crisis; further notes the statements of head teachers and governors across England who no longer trust the Government's ability to administer school funding; recognises the impact of the funding crisis on the Government's teacher workload agreement; believes that the Government's flawed reforms of school funding are to blame for the crisis; and calls on the Government to simplify the school funding system, giving more money direct to schools and giving head teachers more control over how to spend that money.
Sadly, however, what we have seen today is a panicky short-term response that takes money out of one pocket in a school's budget and inserts into another pocket. What we should be hearing from Ministers today is an apology to heads, teachers, local authorities and parents for the spectacular cock-up that they have made of this year's education budget. Instead, they seem determined to lay the blame anywhere else.
Since the Secretary of State has been forced into rushing out the announcement of the various pieces of sticking plaster that he is trying to put over this wound, can he answer some specific questions when he addresses the House? He is telling schools to raid their capital budgets and reserves to try to avoid teachers and teaching assistants being sacked. Can he tell the House what happens to a school facing a huge budget deficit that it cannot cover from reserves or capital, that has a central heating boiler that has just failed or a roof that is leaking directly into the classroom, and that does not therefore have capital available to try to pay salaries?
Mr. Henry Bellingham (North-West Norfolk): I am sorry to intervene on my hon. Friend so early. On the point of capital expenditure, however, is he aware that a school in my constituency, Reffley county primary, which is a beacon school and one of the best and biggest primaries in Norfolk, will be short of £93,000 just by standing still? It has no money in its capital budget, and
no surplus funds, and it will have to get rid of five teaching support staff. What kind of signal does that send to hard-pressed teachers and parents in Norfolk?
Mr. Green: My hon. Friend raises a serious point. All over the country, in his constituency and elsewhere, schools will be looking at the detail of what the Secretary of State announced this morning, just as they looked at the detail of the spending announcements that he made some months ago, and they will realise that whatever hype comes from the Government, they will be worse off. If the measures that he announced this morning actually work in the schools facing the worst problems, the effect will be random.
Mr. Tony Lloyd (Manchester, Central) rose—
Mr. Green: I will give way to the hon. Member for Telford (David Wright).
David Wright: If we assume that the hon. Gentleman does not want to see any resource removed from any local education authority, how much more money does he think that he would need to commit, as a representative of the Opposition, to make it all the better?
Mr. Green: I would commit that when the next Conservative Government spend money on education, we will spend it in schools rather than on bureaucracy.
James Purnell (Stalybridge and Hyde) rose—
Jonathan Shaw (Chatham and Aylesford) rose—
Mr. Green: I will make some progress. I know that the hon. Gentlemen will have many problems in their constituencies, from which their schools are suffering, which I am sure that they will wish to draw to the House's attention.
Mr. Ivan Henderson (Harwich) rose—
Mr. Green: In the meantime, perhaps the hon. Gentlemen would like to listen to the very sensible comments of the National Association of Head Teachers on the Secretary of State's announcement this morning:
- "Converting capital into revenue and licensing deficit budgets could help some schools but these measures, that are akin to 'rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic', will not provide the relief that all schools in trouble desperately need now."
Mrs. Anne Campbell (Cambridge): I am astonished to hear the hon. Gentleman speak in such terms because the previous Conservative Government's term in office was characterised by crumbling schools. Is he aware that under John Major's Government, schools in my constituency lost money every single year? Since 1997, Cambridgeshire has received a 16 per cent. increase in cash funding for schools.
Mr. Green: If the hon. Lady is worried about crumbling schools, does she support her Secretary of State who has today proposed to raid the capital budgets of schools throughout the country? Her logic escapes me.
Mr. Patrick McLoughlin (West Derbyshire): I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way because rather than being given history lessons, most people in education want to know what will happen this year and what the effect will be on their jobs. I received a letter from Turnditch primary school, which is a small primary school, commenting on the changes that the Secretary of State has made to the standards funds, among other things. It says:
- "In other words, our total budget has gone from"
- "an increase of . . . 0.62 per cent."
Mr. Green: My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. I shall address directly the point about the capital budget. The Secretary of State knows that when we approve of things that he does, we do not indulge in knee-jerk opposition. Before today, such approval was given to the way in which he took seriously the need for steady flows of capital to keep the fabric of our schools up to date. The fact that that sensible part of the Government's education strategy has been ditched is a sign of the level of panic in the Department for Education and Skills. Schools will suffer in the long term.
Mr. Green: I shall make some progress.
The Secretary of State rightly sets great stall by the development of specialist schools. He knows that schools in deficit cannot apply for specialist status, yet he has today encouraged schools to go into deficit. He is firing an accurate torpedo into his plans for a rapid expansion of the specialist school network.
The written statement that the Secretary of State put before the House today fascinatingly says:
- "2003–04 is a unique year, because of both the extent of changes in the system for funding schools, and one-off pressures relating to teachers' pensions and National Insurance."
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |