| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Olympic Games
Question
11.30 am
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the success of the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver in relation to their preparations for the Olympic and Paralympic Games in London in 2012.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I am sure that the House will wish to join me in congratulating Amy Williams on her gold medal, and Vancouver on its organisation of an excellent event. Attending the Games was an invaluable opportunity for Ministers and officials to study Vancouver's experience in staging an Olympic Games and, shortly, a Paralympic Games, to learn lessons for London 2012. In particular, Ministers and officials considered issues related to the Games' operations, security, human trafficking and legacy.
Lord Addington: I thank the Minister for that reply. Will he indicate the Government's thinking about the role of parts of government in allowing the party atmosphere to function, which was so commented
4 Mar 2010 : Column 1554
Lord Davies of Oldham: These are important general considerations for the organisation of the Games. We are concerned that the Games are the London Games and predominantly take place in London, but we want the whole country to participate in and enjoy them. That is why we are placing great emphasis on preparation for the Games, the cultural dimension prior to them and the legacy after them. There is no doubt that Vancouver's great success was its ability to canalize the enthusiasm of the Canadian nation for the Games. We need to do that for Britain in 2012.
Baroness Butler-Sloss: My Lords, is the Minister aware, as I am sure he is, that during Olympic Games there is always a considerable increase in prostitution and particularly in trafficking? I declare an interest as vice-chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Human Trafficking. Will the Government give sufficient additional resources, particularly to the Metropolitan Police, to deal with this real problem?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the noble and learned Baroness is right to identify an additional, sad burden that will undoubtedly be attendant on the Games in terms of the extra pressures upon the Metropolitan Police. We have a general security budget of significant proportions related to that. Officers were also sent to Vancouver to work with the Canadian police on exactly this issue and to draw experience from that. The House will know the great difference between Vancouver and London as regards the dimension of these potential problems. The Government are, however, fully seized of the necessity of meeting the threat in the way in which the noble and learned Baroness indicated.
Lord Howard of Rising: My Lords, could the Minister say what action has been taken to ensure that genuine sports fans can obtain tickets for the 2012 Olympics, as they have been able to in Vancouver?
Lord Davies of Oldham: That is a very important point. We are concerned about the affordability of tickets in order that all can participate in the Games and not just those who can afford the sometimes very high prices at certain major events. We will not be able to do exactly what the South Africans did because the World Cup allows the country to dictate its own terms for the sale of tickets. We are governed by Olympic rules-the International Olympic Committee-and we cannot give favours to British people over Europeans because of our membership of the European Community.
Lord Davies of Oldham: And therefore we are concerned to have a large number of tickets at a low price, as it was quite clear from the planning for the Games that that will encourage the fullest participation of our people.
4 Mar 2010 : Column 1555
Lord Clement-Jones: My Lords, there is much to celebrate, and indeed emulate, as my noble friend and the Minister have very clearly pointed out: the volunteers, the enthusiasm and a British gold medal. However, does not the very sad death of Nodar Kumaritashvili demonstrate the clear need for a strong safety culture and a clear assignment of responsibility for safety and of liability for safety?
Lord Davies of Oldham: The noble Lord is right to emphasise that point, although intrinsically the winter sports have a greater danger element to them than the majority of the summer Olympics because of the speed of many of the events. He is absolutely right that safety is a great priority, but the Government's record on health and safety stands out from that of any other country.
The Earl of Listowel: My Lords, is the Minister aware that, following the removal of children from the indigenous people in British Columbia by missionaries in the 1930s, which separated them from their families and caused great harm to the local tribes, the organisers of the Games have taken this opportunity to highlight the importance of these ethnic indigenous peoples, including opening two cultural centres, one in Whistler, for them? Might we not learn from this in our Games and use that opportunity to promote the interests of our most vulnerable people-children in public care who have been separated from their families-and seek to ensure that they feel that they are at the heart of what the Government are undertaking in the Games?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, at the risk of sounding complacent, I do not think that the Government need to learn from that example. After all, the House will recall that children from a wide range of ethnic backgrounds were absolutely crucial to the success of the London bid, which has been infused by concern for the safety and welfare of children and for the part that they can play in the Olympics, not least with regard to some aspects of voluntary support. We want them to participate in the cultural side of the Olympics as well as witness the sporting part. In this area, I do not think that the London Olympic Games will be anything other than a children's festival.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: We have reached 30 minutes.
Business of the House
Timing of Debates
11.37 am
Moved by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon
That the debate on the Motion in the name of Baroness Shephard of Northwold set down for today shall be limited to two and a quarter hours and that in the name of Baroness Miller of Hendon to two and three quarter hours.
4 Mar 2010 : Column 1556
Financial Services Bill
Order of Consideration Motion
11.38 am
Moved by Lord Davies of Oldham:
That it be an instruction to the Committee of the Whole House to which the Financial Services Bill has been committed that they consider the Bill in the following order:
Flood and Water Management Bill
Order of Consideration Motion
11.38 am
Moved by Lord Davies of Oldham
That it be an instruction to the Grand Committee to which the Flood and Water Management Bill has been committed that they consider the Bill in the following order:
Clauses 1 to 30, Schedule 1, Clause 31, Schedule 2, Clause 32, Schedule 3, Clause 33, Schedule 4, Clause 34, Schedule 5, Clauses 35 to 49.
Education: Teaching Excellence
Debate
11.39 am
Moved by Baroness Shephard of Northwold
To call attention to the significance for society and the economy of policies to provide and support teaching excellence in schools, colleges and universities; and to move for papers.
Baroness Shephard of Northwold: My Lords, I am delighted to have the chance to open today's debate, because there can be no disagreement in this House about the importance of education for a healthy society and a thriving economy. Education empowers individuals, endowing them with confidence and self-respect. It civilises society and enriches cultural life. The education of all its citizens to their utmost ability is vital for a nation's economic success, and, importantly, it fosters aspiration and thus social mobility.
Last July's report, Unleashing Aspiration, said:
"Social mobility matters to all of us because ... Economic growth and efficiency rely on nurturing ... all talent in society ... Equality of opportunity is a value cherished across our society and the political spectrum".
4 Mar 2010 : Column 1557
Teaching excellence, whether in a nursery school or a university, drives the motor of effective education. It is the interaction between teacher and pupil which encourages and inspires.
So where are we after 13 years of a Labour Government who came to power with the admirable mantra, "education, education, education"? I know that we will hear later of the extra investment that the Government have put into the education system, which is welcome. There has been an equally welcome development of many of the initiatives introduced, I have to say, by the previous Conservative Government, such as an emphasis on early-years education, increased opportunities for childcare, literacy and numeracy, and more emphasis on diversity and freedom for schools and colleges.
But there have been other less welcome developments. The jury is out on the widened remit for Ofsted. No matter how talented its current leadership, Ofsted would be more effective if it were allowed to return to its strong focus on school improvement. The introduction of children's departments seems, sadly, so far to have done little to improve child protection, but it has involved local authorities in expensive and distracting reorganisation to produce departments that no professionals are qualified to run, the effects of which we shall see on schools and colleges in due course. Certainly, educational leadership at local level has suffered. Head teachers have been all but submerged by the sheer volume of instructions from the Government. Each head has had to read more in circulars in the past year than there are words in the King James Bible. I will come later to the cuts in higher education.
If we take social mobility, which is much talked of at the moment, as a measure of the effectiveness of our education system, the Government's achievements of the past 13 years could be described as disappointing. The National Equality Panel has pointed out that we are a more unequal society than in 1997. The gap between the poorest and richest is at its widest since the Second World War. This is extraordinary after 13 years of a Labour Government. The report, Unleashing Aspiration, states that the professions key to social mobility have become more, not less, socially exclusive. The growth in higher education has benefited higher social classes far more than the rest of the population. In 1997, 8.5 per cent of 16 to 19 year-olds were not in work, education or training. Now, 13.4 per cent of that group are unoccupied. Nearly 40 per cent of children on free school meals fail to get a single grade C pass at GCSE. John Denham recently claimed that race is now a less severe impediment to life chances than poverty and social class. That is a success on one front, but what about the other two?
Obviously, we know that education is only one element in achieving greater social mobility. Parenting, home environment, maternal and child health, and wealth are all factors in educational attainment. Research from the Institute of Education-I should declare an interest in that I have recently become the chairman of its council-finds that only 10 per cent to 20 per cent of variation in pupil outcomes is attributable to differences between schools. But schools matter, because teachers do. That is the core of my argument today. Excellent teaching matters at every level of education in schools,
4 Mar 2010 : Column 1558
In schools, IoE research has found that having a good rather than a weak teacher improves performance by more than one GCSE grade and that the gains from having a good teacher are greater for lower attainers. If we care about social mobility, we have to care about the quality of teachers. I am not at all a recent convert to the key importance of teachers for the success and well-being of our society and economy. As a former education officer and schools inspector, I have always believed that if just one thing can make a difference to education, it is the quality of teachers. If we think about it, teachers are the only means of delivering education reform. Even the most ambitious education Secretary eventually realises that he or she cannot be in every classroom. It takes longer for some, but most eventually get there.
It is all too easy to undermine the confidence of teachers. I recall in the late 1960s-my goodness, how time passes-being involved in in-service training for heads and teachers in 550 primary schools across the county of Norfolk to teach them Nuffield maths, the so-called introduction of modern maths. This is history for some in this House, but not for everyone. What we did in the first instance was to remove the confidence from people who had been teaching what was known as number arithmetic perfectly satisfactorily, and make them uncertain about their skills and confidence vis-à-vis their pupils. We did put it right, but what an expensive, costly and actually rather ludicrous thing to do.
The debate about education policy for the past 30 years has not entirely ignored the importance of good teaching, but it has focused in both parties more on the structure of the system and on schools than on those who work in them. IoE research has found that use of market forces to raise standards by introducing competition between schools, for example, has had limited impact, mostly because of the difficulties parents face in exercising a choice between schools. On the other hand, research findings from the IoE on the importance of the role of teachers are unequivocal.
Structural change has quite a lot to be said for it if it enhances the ability of teachers to work well and confidently, and that should be the test. Teachers need to work in a well led school, and I am glad that the Government have developed extremely well the training of head teachers, which was initiated in my time as Secretary of State. Schools should be freed as much as possible from bureaucratic intervention by local authorities and government. They should work well with parents and their communities. They should be strongly inspected by good professionals. They need a clear curriculum framework and a respected, rigorous framework of tests and examinations. If all of that is called structure, and if the structure can provide those conditions, teachers will flourish. Like most professionals, they can be at their creative best if they have the security of knowing what is expected of them and are not subject to constant changes of expectation from government and the public.
4 Mar 2010 : Column 1559
We all know that the influence of an inspiring teacher can be life-changing. One of this country's top astrophysicists with a global reputation was inspired by a Workers' Educational Association lecturer when he was 14. At the other extreme, children with poor life chances can be transformed by the teaching they get at schools like the Bishop Challoner schools in Tower Hamlets or at a first-class nursery school. Disaffected young people can be turned around by the right teacher, and the potential of a Nobel prize winner can be spotted and nurtured. The role of excellence in teaching and in fostering aspiration is clear. So how should education policy reflect the simple fact that what matters is teaching excellence?
The whole question of esteem is very important; people want to join a respected profession. Raising pay is obviously important for that reason, although it is a slow and expensive way of improving teacher quality. Good and practical initial teacher training is as important as can be. Also effective is consistent investment in continuing professional development. The new masters degree in teaching and learning is an important step and should be rolled out more widely when funds allow. We certainly need flexibility in the system to reward good teaching and to deal with bad teaching. Such flexibility was one of the strengths of CTCs when they were introduced, and it is an aspiration for the new academies which the Government are introducing.
Teaching as a career needs to be attractive to good graduates who have a grasp of and enthusiasm for their subject which can be passed on. At every level, the best teachers are those who are enthusiastic and highly knowledgeable; who have a depth of knowledge on which they draw to the benefit of their pupils. For that reason, we should make every effort to make it easy for talented people to turn to teaching in mid-career by developing and extending the Teach Now initiative. Good leadership of schools is crucial because well led schools have good discipline and provide a positive environment for teaching and learning. It is interesting that recent research indicates that head teachers who lead more than one school, a group of schools, are making a real difference to the performance and outcomes of all the schools they lead, particularly those in the most challenging environments. This, of course, is the federation model pioneered in Kent.
We are all concerned about education. I am sure that all noble Lords agree that the role of excellent teaching in schools, colleges and universities is absolutely vital because of the effect that outstanding teachers have on learning, scholarship, disaffection and social mobility. It is therefore the more extraordinary and inexplicable that this Government-the Government of "education, education, education"-have imposed an arbitrary £1 billion cut on the higher education sector, which is the seed bed of education and teaching excellence. I am sure that when the Minister winds up she will address the issue because, whatever else she has to say about the Government's support for education and whatever else they have done, she will understand that that has to be set against the mighty blow they have inflicted upon it.
4 Mar 2010 : Column 1560
I say again, it has been a huge privilege to introduce this debate, especially in your Lordships' House, where there is always great and warm support for education and learning. I beg to move.
11.53 am
Baroness Massey of Darwen: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Shephard, for introducing the debate. I am delighted to follow her because I agree with much of what she said and I think she will agree with much of what I have to say. Her passion for education is well known. I, too, have a passion for education and I will focus also mainly on schools. I agree that school improvement, as the noble Baroness said, is key. I do not see, however, an overemphasis on structure.
I taught in secondary schools for many happy years. I worked with some magnificent teachers, who did wonders with pupils of all abilities. Many of those pupils attained remarkable results despite being from deprived backgrounds. One of the key factors in creating a good team of teachers, a good atmosphere for learning and a desire to enable aspiration is, as the noble Baroness said, good leadership in schools, which is what I shall talk about today after I have said a word about the teaching workforce.
I shall refer to two agencies that support the development of good schools: the Training Development Agency for Schools and the National College for Leadership of Schools and Children's Services. I shall also illustrate the impact of these agencies with reference to a particular school, and mention the national support schools.
The Training Development Agency seeks to secure an effective school workforce that raises educational standards and improves children's chances. Feedback from teachers has been very positive, and the government target for teacher recruitment has been met or exceeded in all subjects. The National College for School Leadership works to develop great leaders in schools, earlier settings and children's services, thus enhancing the chances for children.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |