---

Baroness Young: I too will listen very closely to what my noble friend the Minister has to say on the matter. As I understand the position on the Bill--and I may not have got it right--one of the proposals is that there will be a baseline assessment of children entering primary schools. I understand that its object is to find out exactly where the children stand when they begin school. For precisely the arguments that the noble Baroness has put forward about whether they are from families where English has never been spoken or there are handicaps of one kind or another, these can be identified. In a primary school the object is to set targets for what should be achieved.

My experience of trying to raise standards in anything is that one has to set a target of what one believes and hopes can be achieved so that everyone will come up to that standard. As I understand it, it is intended to help the school and the teacher by having this measurement taken when a pupil arrives at the primary school. The primary school will be required to assess pupils shortly after admission to the school in order to provide the information which will help teachers to plan the children's education and to establish the baseline from which their future education can be measured.

Lord Tope: With respect, I believe that the noble Baroness is missing the point of our amendment. I have

24 Feb 1997 : Column 943

no objection to baseline assessments and, similarly, I believe that the other opposition parties support them. Baseline assessments are good and necessary and they already happen. They are good practice. But they happen after the child has been admitted to the school. The noble Baroness, Lady Farrington, has said that she would forbear from mentioning this, but such assessments are not used--and I hope that they never will be--as a means for selecting children before they go into school. Therefore, our problem is not with baseline assessments which we support, but with selecting pupils before entering a primary school.

Baroness Young: We shall have to wait to hear what the Minister says in reply. I am very glad that we are all agreed about baseline assessment. But as I understand the position, the object of this exercise is to assess what the child requires in the primary school and to set an objective target for all pupils.

Lord Henley: I begin with baseline assessments. I am glad that my noble friend Lady Young recognises their importance. I am also grateful that everyone else recognises their importance. For once we are all in agreement, but I do not know whether that means that we are probably all wrong although there are occasions when that rule applies.

I understand that the noble Baroness has concerns that baseline assessment could be used for selection in primary schools. I want to make it absolutely clear that it could not be so used as the timing of the statutory baseline assessment will be specified in regulations, which will specify that the assessment must take place after the child has been enrolled in the school. For that simple reason it could not be used as a form of test for selection to the school.

Another question is whether an admission authority could use baseline assessment material produced by SCAA to select pupils before they enrol in the school. That is not the purpose for which these materials are being currently designed by SCAA. As now, it will be for admission authorities to decide what methods to use for assessing ability and aptitude. Obviously, it would be up to them to make use of those assessments if they so wish.

I come back to the main point about selection in primary schools. I recognise that the noble Baroness will want to return to baseline assessments or the major issues relating to them, later on in the Bill and I accept that absolutely.

As regards selection in primary schools, I assure the Committee that the present regime covering selective admissions is exactly the same for primary schools as for secondary schools. Publication of statutory proposals would be required if a school wanted to introduce or to extend selection to a degree which would amount to making a significant change in the character of the school. One then has all the safeguards such as going to the Secretary of State and so on. My right honourable friend has always made it clear that in her view selecting up to 15 per cent. of a school's intake (primary or

24 Feb 1997 : Column 944

secondary) does not constitute a significant change of character. To that extent, the Bill does not introduce anything new.

The Bill sets a new statutory baseline threshold of 20 per cent. for selective admissions, with higher thresholds for specialist and grant-maintained schools. We believe that just as the present regime does not discriminate between primary and secondary schools, the new baseline threshold should apply to both. We do not believe that many--if any--primary schools will wish to select pupils by general ability. I fully accept the points made by the noble Baroness about children developing at different rates. I know that from my own small children. I recognise also the problems faced by those without English as their mother tongue, if I may use that rather old-fashioned expression. That is why we do not believe that many--if any--primary schools would want to select by general ability. However, it is possible that some may want to do so by aptitude in a particular subject. I believe that one of my honourable friends in another place cited the example of music. I suspect that that is one of only a very few examples that might appear.

The other important point to remember is that the Bill does not require primary school governing bodies to consider whether to introduce or extend selection each year, as it does for secondary schools. However, we believe that primary schools should have the same options as most secondary schools--and that is what the Bill gives them.

With those assurances and the assurance that there is no secret plot, as the noble Baroness seemed to imply, to extend selection to the whole of the primary sector, I hope that the noble Baroness will be prepared to withdraw her amendment.

The noble Baroness also raised a number of concerns about nursery schools and children with special needs. Those matters are not really for discussion this evening, but if the noble Baroness has particular concerns and would like to come to see me about them, bearing in mind my interest in the department in children with special needs, I am more than happy to accommodate her.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton: That was an interesting reply. At the beginning of it, I thought that I was going to rise in order to apologise to the Minister for having asked a, "Will you please in future stop beating your wife?" question. The Minister replied--metaphorically, of course--that he had never intended to beat his wife in this case--or to put forward legislation that would allow primary schools to select their pupils. There appeared to be an outbreak of total agreement across the Committee. However, then we discovered that in the past it has been legal for people to do such wife beating (in the shape of selecting by ability and/or aptitude at primary level) but that nobody ever did it, so the wives were safe and the children were not selected when very tiny. Then we were told--

Lord Henley: I do not think that I ever said that nobody ever beat their wife, if the noble Baroness wants to put it that way. It may be that some primary schools

24 Feb 1997 : Column 945

use a degree of selection by selecting children with, say, an aptitude for music. So be it, let them do that because they can do so for up to 15 per cent. of their intake. All that the Bill seeks to do is to extend that proportion to 20 per cent.

5.45 p.m.

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton: I would be deeply concerned if primary schools selected by musical ability at the age of five because I suspect that at that age the overwhelming majority of children in this country have not even had the opportunity to see whether they have a gift for playing a musical instrument or for singing. However, I leave that to one side.

Having agreed that none of us knows whether this mechanism has been used--and, where there is agreement, it is on the basis that if it has been used, it has been used on only a minor scale--the Government now say that they wish to set in statute the ability to do something that we all agree is not really a very good idea. I find that quite strange. I shall read with care the Minister's words in Hansard and I may well return to this matter at a later stage. I have every faith in the Minister and his total innocence when it comes to the sort of wife beating we are talking about, but leaving the whip hanging over the door is something that we on these Benches would have to consider carefully. I beg leave--

Baroness David: Before my noble friend withdraws her amendment, I am sorry to be so ignorant, but could the Minister tell me where in legislation that 15 per cent. is announced?

Lord Henley: The 15 per cent. is not specified in legislation. The legislation refers to a significant change in character. On taking legal advice, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State was advised that a significant change of character would be represented by a selection ratio of 15 per cent. or more. That has been the understanding for some time. As I said, we believe that both primary and secondary schools should be treated in the same way. The Bill simply extends the proportion to 20 per cent.

---