| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Skills (Phil Hope): I congratulate the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. Bone) on securing this debate. I am aware of his interest in this issue from the parliamentary questions that he has tabled in the past.
Changes to school provision in an area are essentially a matter for local decision. The local authority has a statutory responsibility for planning sufficient school places and for proposing to close schools and to open new ones. These duties are further strengthened in the schools White Paper, which the hon. Gentleman mentioned, and I shall say more about that later if time allows.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the relevant mechanisms, and I will start by talking about the present school organisation arrangements and why they came about. Before this Government took office in 1997, proposals for changes to schools often came to the Secretary of State for a decision. We considered that those matters were best decided locally, however, and a new system was put in place by the School Standards and Framework Act 1998.
If a local authority decides that there is a need for a new school, it must first consult in the local area. Among those bodies that we advise should be consulted are any schools affected by the proposals, as well as parents and teachers in the area. I am pleased to say that the guidance was revised in September, when local Members of Parliament were added to the list, as were the local district and parish councils in the area in which the schools are situated. Local authorities are responsible for planning for school places in their area. They have a statutory duty to ensure that there are sufficient places and that high quality education is provided in a cost-effective way.
I understand that Northamptonshire updated its school organisation plan in September this year. The new plan shows that the authority expects the number of secondary pupils in Wellingborough to increase gradually between now and 2008. However, there are at present 425 surplus places in the town. I shall come back to that point in more detail in a moment. In the longer term, a new secondary school might be required, and if Northamptonshire decides that such a school is needed to cater for a growth in the local population, the mechanism requires it to hold a competition in accordance with the provisions of the Education Act 2002. We have introduced competitions because we want to encourage a wide range of educational providers to come forward and promote schools that have a strong ethos. This is all part of our aim to drive up standards and to ensure that every child has the opportunity to go to a good school.
As the hon. Gentleman has asked, I shall explain what would happen should Northamptonshire decide to hold a competition. First, the authority would publish a notice inviting interested parties to bring forward proposals for the new secondary school. The authority would then publish a summary of all the proposals received and any that it wished to make itself, as the local authority. Anyone would be able to pass comments on any of the proposals, be they objections or
2 Dec 2005 : Column 582
expressions of support. The authority would then submit all proposals and comments to the school organisation committee for consideration. The committee would pass the proposals, with its comments, to the Secretary of State for a decision.
Of course, any promoter may publish proposals for a new foundation or voluntary school at any time, under the existing arrangements, to increase diversity. There does not need to be a general shortage of places. Such proposals are decided by the school organisation committee, or by the schools adjudicator if the committee cannot reach unanimous agreement. The committee may approve proposals only if it is satisfied that any capital necessary to implement the proposals has been secured. I hope that I have described the mechanism in a straightforward manner.
Under the normal funding arrangements, the Department for Education and Skills is allocating Northamptonshire schools more than £78 million of capital over the next three years. We expect that money to be used for its priority needs, including the provision of statutory school places. It includes an element to cover pupil number increases. However, local authorities can also apply to the targeted capital fund—the TCF—every two years, if they have exceptional growth that they cannot fund from other sources.
Northamptonshire has been allocated £12 million from the TCF for 2006–07 for a replacement school in another part of the county where it is prioritising need. Northamptonshire did not apply in the TCF round for 2007–08 funding. It will have a further opportunity in due course to apply for 2008–09 funding.
On the revenue side, Northamptonshire has benefited from an increase in its total funding for education of £1,100 per pupil in real terms since 1997. We will announce in the near future the school funding settlement for 2006–07 and 2007–08, including each local authority's allocations of the new dedicated schools grant for each of those years.
In the longer term, the building schools for the future programme—a massive investment in schooling—will support investment in all secondary schools in Northamptonshire, including new schools, where there is a need. Northamptonshire is expected to enter the building schools for the future programme in waves seven to nine—2011–14—with projects in Northampton and Corby. It has proposed five geographical groupings of schools for its building schools for the future investment. Wellingborough, as the hon. Gentleman rightly said, is prioritised in the final tranche of investment in waves 13 to 15, in 2017–18.
I want to set out the detail of the local position that the hon. Gentleman described. I understand that since the closure of the John Lea school more than seven years ago in July 1998, Wellingborough has been served by three secondary schools. The John Lea school was closed because the number of pupils on the roll fell below 50, with more than 90 per cent. surplus places, and funding empty places, as we know, can represent a poor use of resources. The three remaining schools—Sir Christopher Hatton, the Weavers school and Wrenn school—now have 425 spare places between them.
I am aware—and the hon. Gentleman mentioned—that the Weavers school has been in special measures since November 2004. In conjunction with Ofsted, the
2 Dec 2005 : Column 583
authority is addressing that. The new head teacher is helping the process and two additional school governors have been appointed to provide additional support. The local authority is also supporting the school, and there have been discussions with Department for Education and Skills advisers about how that can most effectively be done The Department has partnered Northamptonshire and Lincolnshire for the new relationship with schools. Each school will be allocated a school improvement partner, who are mostly experienced head teachers and senior managers in schools. They will provide high-quality support, challenge and monitoring. Given the hon. Gentleman's concern about the quality of education at that school and its current position, I advise him strongly to get active and join the school and local authority in finding ways in which the school can turn the situation around.
On the question of growth, which has been raised by the hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members in the Chamber, the authority is confident that recent enlargements to its secondary schools will provide sufficient capacity to meet future demand for places in the medium term. In the longer term, Northamptonshire might decide that a new secondary school will be required to cater for growth in the local population, but that will be a decision for Northamptonshire at a local level. I understand that there are no current plans to open a further secondary school in Wellingborough, but the local authority will monitor that situation and the progress with growth projections, which he mentioned earlier.
I have described the situation that pertains to date, so I shall briefly mention some of the changes that we propose in the White Paper, which might have some future relevance to the issues raised by the hon. Gentleman. Building on the progress that we have made
2 Dec 2005 : Column 584
since 1997, our aim is to transform our school system, so that every child receives an excellent education, whatever their background and wherever they live.
The White Paper sets out our plans to improve radically the system by putting parents and the needs of their children at the heart of our school system. We will ensure that every school delivers an excellent education, that every child achieves to their potential and that the system as a whole is increasingly driven by parents and by choice.
We are going to introduce tougher rules for failing schools. Schools in special measures will be more quickly turned around and where no progress is made after a year a competition for new providers will be held. Schools that receive a notice to improve from Ofsted will enter special measures within a year if progress is not made. Parents will be able to urge Ofsted action, or request new providers. Where there is strong demand or dissatisfaction with existing choices, local authorities will have to respond to their concerns.
Time does not allow me to go into more detail unfortunately, but there is a new approach, in particular with the abolition of school organisation committees, which gives local authorities a key role in making decisions on the most appropriate schools for an area. The authority will be expected to assess proposals that it receives on their merits and approve the one that best meets the needs of the area. Under the new regime, it will be possible for a local authority's decision to be challenged, in which case the schools adjudicator will make a decision.
I hope that I have described the mechanisms, outlined some of the factors that will affect a decision in terms of timing—
The motion having been made after half-past Two o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. Deputy Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |