|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what the evidential basis was for the statement made in the leaflet Talking to Your Teenager About Sex and Relationships that trying to convince teenagers of what's right and wrong may discourage them from being open; who his Department consulted before making this statement; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) on what date the leaflet Talking to Your Teenager About Sex and Relationships produced by his Department was published; if he will place a copy of the leaflet in the Library; who wrote the leaflet; who was consulted prior to it being (a) written and (b) published; and if he will make a statement; 
Beverley Hughes: The leaflet for parents on talking to their teenage children about sex and relationships strongly encourages them to share their values with their children and that clearly includes their views about what's right and wrong. However, the leaflet also draws on research summarised in The Nature of Adolescence (John Coleman and Leo Hendry, 1999) which shows that the most effective way of communicating with teenagers is to encourage discussion rather than simply telling them what to think. Teenagers whose parents have an authoritative rather than authoritarian style are less likely to be involved in risky behaviour.
The leaflet highlights the important role that parentsfathers and mothershave in: helping their daughters and sons resist pressure to have early sex; to understand their feelings and the feelings of others; and to take responsibility for preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) if and when they do choose to become sexually active.
The leaflet was drafted by DCSF officials in conjunction with colleagues at Parentline Plus. The content was informed by research into parents' views and experiences of talking to their teenage children. There was no formal public consultation on the leaflet before it was published. The leaflet will be available in pharmacies from early March 2009. The total cost of design, print and production of the leaflet was £14,427. A copy of the leaflet will be placed in the House Libraries.
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer of 10 December 2008, Official Report, columns 181-3W, on history: education, in which local authority area
each of the schools listed is located; and how many and what percentage of pupils in each school are eligible to receive free school meals. 
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what guidance his Department has issued on the publication of minutes and decisions taken by local safeguarding children boards that do not relate to a particular case or individual; and if he will make a statement. 
Beverley Hughes: The Department does not prescribe how minutes and decisions taken by Local Safeguarding Children Boards (LSCBs) which do not relate to particular cases or individuals should be published. The Government's statutory guidance, Working Together to Safeguard Children (2006) states that,
The LSCB should have a clear work programme, including measurable objectives, and a budget.
This will enable the LSCB's work to be scrutinised by the Local Authority, by other local partners and by other key stakeholders. The guidance recommends that such work plans or annual reports are endorsed by all the Board members and made publicly available.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the estimated cost in empty property business rates for the vacant properties recorded on the e-PIMS database owned by safeguarding children boards Ofsted is in 2008-09. 
Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as Her Majestys Chief Inspector, for a response.
Ofsted had three vacant properties recorded on the e-PIMS database in 2008-09, all of which are leasehold. Table A shows the non-domestic rates payments for these properties.
|Table A: Non-domestic rates payments on Ofsted properties recorded on the e-PIMs database in 2008-09|
A copy of this reply has been sent to Rt Hon Jim Knight MP, Minister of State for Schools and Learners and will be placed in the library of both Houses.
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what recent discussions he has had with Ministerial colleagues in the
Department of Health on the provision of support in schools for students diagnosed with (a) diabetes, (b) asthma and (c) other long-term conditions. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: The Department for Children, Schools and Families and Department of Health have been jointly developing the Governments long-term strategy to support childrens health. The Child Health Strategy will build on work already being delivered through the Every Child Matters and National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity Services.
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families which local authorities are reducing the number of surplus places as part of (a) the Primary Capital Programme and (b) Building Schools for the Future programme. 
Jim Knight: We do not collect programme specific data about the reduction of surplus places linked directly to capital investment through either Building Schools for the Future or the Primary Capital Programme. We have nevertheless made clear in relation to both programmes that all local authorities should look for opportunities to remove excessive numbers of surplus places; particularly where these are linked to poor standards. Maintaining surplus places can represent a poor use of resourcesresources that can be used more effectively to support schools in raising standards and delivering better outcomes for children. That said, it is accepted that in order to preserve access for young children, there may be more empty places in schools in rural areas than in urban areas.
Mark Pritchard: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what recent assessment he has made of levels of compliance by schools with guidance on provisions for assemblies and daily acts of collective worship under the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: All community, foundation or voluntary schools must offer a daily act of collective worship which is broadly of a Christian nature. Parents have the right to withdraw their children from collective worship and pupils in the sixth form have the right to withdraw themselves from collective worship without parental consent.
Ofsted has a duty to inspect schools on their compliance with the legal requirement to provide a daily act of worship. Schools and governing bodies can be deemed unsatisfactory for failing to comply with the statutory requirements. The findings of inspection, set alongside the schools self-evaluation, provide a basis for planning for improvement.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families when he expects his Department to meet its target of raising the level of funding per state school pupil to the level of funding per pupil in the private sector; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Knight: The Government announced in the Budget in 2006 that they would aim, over time and adjusting for inflation, to increase funding per pupil towards private sector day school levels at that time. Average private sector per pupil funding was estimated at £8,000 compared to the total revenue and capital funding per pupil in the maintained sector of £4,750 in that year.
We are investing record amounts of funding for schools. From 1997 total per pupil funding has more than doubled from under £2,500 in 1997-98 to £5,550 in 2007-08. By 2010-11, the total per pupil funding for the state sector will rise to £6,550. This means that between 2005-06 and 2010-11, we will have raised maintained sector funding by £1,000 per pupil in real terms and will have closed the gap with the private sector 2005-06 figure by 30 per cent.
Progress over future spending reviews will depend upon the Governments fiscal position, demographic change and progress by schools in continuing to deliver improvements in results and wider support for parents and pupils.
All figures rounded to nearest £50.
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) whether his Departments plans to require companies working on school capital programmes to submit a formal training programme will apply to (a) Building Schools for the Future projects which have already been approved and (b) the Primary Capital Programme; 
Jim Knight: Many Building Schools for the Future (BSF) bidders already submit proposals for provision of apprenticeships and other training programmes in such areas as construction, technical building services, facilities management and ICT etc., but to date there has been no formal requirement for local authorities to include such proposals in their service specifications. From June 2009 these requirements will become formalised for new projects only and be assessed by Partnerships for Schools and the local authority through the procurement process.
The pre-Budget report in November announced that Government Departments and their agencies committed that whenever they let a new construction contract they will consider making it a requirement that successful contractors have apprentices as a proportion of the project work force. This commitment will apply to the strategic, centrally-managed BSF programme. In relation
to devolved capital programmes and Primary Capital Programme projects not delivered through BSF, we want to see local authorities taking forward the skills procurement agenda using their contract management and planning powers in construction and other service areas including facilities management and ICT. In addition to the letting of new contracts, local authorities can also work with existing contractors and encourage them to provide training and apprenticeships training opportunities for their work force. To support the implementation of the skills procurement agenda, DIUS officials are working with OGC to develop and disseminate guidance on how skills requirements can be included in the procurement processes.
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families if he will place in the Library a copy of each piece of guidance issued by his Department made available to all schools on the use of physical restraint in the last 12 months. 
Jim Knight: The Department issued revised guidance for schools, entitled The Use of Force to Control or Restrain Pupils, in November 2007. This guidance advises school staff that force should only be used when there is no viable alternative and when the risks associated with using force are outweighed by the risks associated with not using force.
The guidance is supplemented by two specialist guidance documents which provide additional information for staff working with pupils with special educational needs and/or disabilities, namely: (i) Guidance on the Use of Restrictive Physical Interventions for Staff Working with Children and Adults who display Extreme Behaviour in Association with Learning Disability and/or Autistic Spectrum Disorders (Circ LEA/0242/2002); and (ii) Guidance on the Use of Restrictive Physical Interventions for Pupils with Severe Behavioural Difficulties (Circ LEA/0264/2003).
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families which maintained secondary schools have been included in (a) education action zones, (b) Excellence in Cities, (c) Fresh Start, (d) the London Challenge and (e) the National Challenge since 1997. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: The Department does not have a readily available list of maintained secondary schools that were included in Education Action Zones and the various Excellence in Cities programmes between 1999 and 2006. There would be a disproportionate cost involved in creating lists of these schools.
A large proportion of the maintained secondary schools in London have benefited from the range of support provided by London Challenge since the programme began in 2003. Schools that have received the most focused support are, or have been, part of the Keys to Success programme, which offers bespoke support tailored to the needs of individual schools. A list providing details of all schools that have been supported by the
Keys to Success programme since it began will be placed in the Library of both Houses. It includes those schools that have since closed or become academies.
In addition, we have placed in the Libraries lists of the maintained secondary schools that have closed and reopened under the DCSF Fresh Start programme and of those in the National Challenge, where fewer than 30 per cent. of pupils at the end of key stage 4 achieved 5 A*-C grades at GCSE (or equivalent) in 2007 and 2008.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what percentage of pupils with statemented special educational needs of behavioural, emotional or social difficulties attended mainstream schools in each local authority in the last 12 months for which records are available. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Information on the number and percentage of statemented pupils by type of special educational need, for both primary and state funded secondary schools for January 2008, has been placed in the Library.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the Answer of 23 February 2009, Official Report, columns 470-74W, on special educational needs: private sector, in which local authority area each of the schools listed is located. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: The 228 independent schools catering wholly or mainly for pupils with special educational needs which opened between 1 September 2005 and 31 August 2008 are listed alphabetically below in local authority order.
The Education Act 2002 amended the definition of an independent school to include institutions providing full time education for one or more pupils with a statement of special educational needs or a looked after child. This resulted in a number of childrens homes which provide education on the premises registering as independent schools.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|