House of Commons Hansard Debates for 2 Nov 1993

Nursery Education

7. Mr. Wray : To ask the Secretary of State for Education what guidelines he recommends for pupil-teacher ratios for nursery education in areas of deprivation.

Mr. Robin Squire : There are no recommendations made on staffing levels specifically for nursery education in areas of deprivation. The long -standing recommended staffing levels for all pupils in nursery education are for a minimum of two staff members for every 26 children in nursery classes and two for 20 children in nursery schools ; in both cases, one member of staff should be a qualified teacher and one a qualified nursery assistant.

Mr. Wray : According to the statistics from the Library, 26 : 1 is the average pupil-teacher ratio in the United Kingdom. Does the Minister agree that thousands of children are missing out on nursery education? Will he take a leaf out of the Plowden report, which recommends that areas of deprivation should have pupil-teacher ratios as low as 10 : 1? Does not the Government's capping of local authorities mean that they cannot spend the money that they would like to spend on nursery education?

Mr. Squire : As the hon. Gentleman knows, and as has already been referred to, how money is used by local authorities is a matter for them. The hon. Gentleman also knows that within the grant distribution system, significant extra sums go to areas of major deprivation.

Mr. Anthony Coombs : Does my hon. Friend agree with Ofsted and Professor David Hargreaves, former chief inspector of the Inner London education authority, that standards in nursery schools and the primary sector in deprived areas depend not so much on pupil-teacher ratios as on high expectations from teachers and good leadership from head teachers? Is not it true that those are underpinned by policies of rigorous assessment and league tables, which are understood by the vast majority of parents in Britain but are completely misunderstood by the Opposition?

Mr. Squire : I agree with my hon. Friend's excellent comments. I suspect that one thing that would transform education in some of our inner cities would be the

Column 144

stretching of all pupils by teachers so that pupils are tested to the very limit of their abilities rather than taught down to.

Mrs. Ann Taylor : In view of the Minister's last answer, will he clarify the Government's position with regard to nursery school league tables? Does the Minister accept that the Ofsted report, praised by the Under-Secretary of State for Further and Higher Education earlier this afternoon, points out the critical role of nursery education? Is not it a remarkable condemnation of 14 years of Conservative Government that so many young children are denied the best start in education? If parents, governors, teachers and now Ofsted can see the value of nursery education, why will not Ministers lift one finger to help extend nursery provision and provide the best start for all our children?

Mr. Squire : Far from simply lifting a finger, as the hon. Lady says, the Government have acted and significantly increased the numbers in nursery education since we have been in power. But we do not believe that nursery education is the only answer for pre-school aged children. As the hon. Lady well knows, more than 90 per cent. of three and four-year-olds in Britain are educated in some form of group activity, a rich and varied form of education and training.

Grant-maintained Schools

9. Mrs. Peacock : To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many local authorities now have more than 10 per cent. of their pupils being educated in grant-maintained schools.

The Secretary of State for Education (Mr. John Patten) : In 30 local authorities, 10 per cent. or more of all pupils are already being educated in self-governing schools. In 47 local authorities, more than 10 per cent. of secondary pupils are educated in grant-maintained schools and 15 per cent. of the country's secondary pupils are now educated in grant- maintained schools--nearly 500,000 pupils today.

Mrs. Peacock : What responsibilities will the funding agency have for schools in areas in which more than 10 per cent. of pupils are in grant -maintained schools?

Mr. Patten : The new Funding Agency for Schools will have considerable powers in such areas. Once more than 75 per cent. of pupils in either the primary or secondary sector are being educated in grant- maintained schools, the Funding Agency for Schools will take over the planning of school places in its entirety. Local education authorities can ask to go into the care of the Funding Agency for Schools long before that if they wish. Already at least one borough, Hillingdon, has passed the 75 per cent. point, so from 1 April the Funding Agency for Schools will be dealing with all the schools in Hillingdon, shortly to be joined by Brent and a good number of other local authorities.

Mrs. Anne Campbell : What plans does the Secretary of State have to force all schools to adopt grant-maintained status by abolishing local education authorities and when can we expect an announcement about that?

Mr. Patten : None, Madam Speaker.

Column 145

Mr. Pawsey : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the principal opposition to grant-maintained schools comes from two sources ; politically motivated local education authorities and local education authorities which seek to protect their education empires? Will my right hon. Friend accept my congratulations on the appointment of Sir Christopher Benson to the Funding Agency for Schools? Does he agree that Sir Christopher will reach those parts of the educational scene that other educationists will not reach?

Mr. Patten : On the first two parts of my hon. Friend's question, the answers are yes and yes.

As for Sir Christopher Benson, we are extremely fortunate to have the present serving chairman of the Housing Corporation moving to the Funding Agency for Schools. He is a man with an international reputation and that makes the attack on him in The Guardian by the Opposition spokesman on education all the more disgraceful. He has not been attacked by any Labour Front Bencher during his tenure as chairman of the Housing Corporation, yet the hon. Lady has started to attack him before he has even taken up his job.

Mrs. Ann Taylor : Will the Secretary of State confirm that there were 95 school ballots on grant-maintained status in October last year, while there were just 19 ballots in October this year? Will the Secretary of State also confirm that it is five years to the day since the first school ballots for grant-maintained status took place and that, at the rate at which schools have become grant-maintained, it will take the best part of the century to reach the Government's targets?

Does the Secretary of State have any plans to revise the targets, now that his bribe-and-divide policy is simply running out of steam?

Mr. Patten : We have no targets ; we have figures. Already this year some 450 schools have taken part in ballots on grant-maintained status and there will be another 50 ballots before Christmas. The hon. Lady simply does not understand her brief. I understand that a learned judge has said recently that repetitive strain injury does not exist ; repetitive political self-damage occurs every time that the hon. Lady opens her mouth.

Mr. Burns : Will my right hon. Friend join me in condemning the petty, vicious and nasty policy of the Labour and Liberal-controlled Essex county council, which is seeking to cut all capital funding to any school in Essex which thinks about or puts in motion a grant-maintained ballot?

Mr. Patten : I am afraid that the Lib-Lab-Democrat pact which is now in charge in Essex runs Kent very close for the title of the worst education authority among the new Lib-Lab controlled shires. I agree with everything that my hon. Friend said. It is entirely wrong for any local authority to attempt to use bully-boy--and, to satisfy the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor),

bully-girl--tactics to stop schools voting in favour of

grant-maintained status.

Column 146

Literacy

10. Mr. Robert Ainsworth : To ask the Secretary of State for Education what recent study he has made of national literacy standards.

Mr. Patten : Standards in the teaching and learning of reading and writing in schools are continually monitored by the Office for Standards in Education, and the national curriculum testing arrangements for English will provide a regular measurement of the attainment of pupils. Adult literacy is monitored on the Government's behalf by the excellent adult literacy and basic skills unit. The raising of literacy standards is a top priority for the Government's policies for education and is reflected by the substantial support which we are providing for the Reading Recovery and the Family Literacy initiatives.

Mr. Ainsworth : The Minister will be aware of the planned reduction from £129 million to £90 million of section 11 funding. Those cuts will affect Coventry, where three quarters of that money is spent on English as a second language. How on earth do those cuts fit in with the Government's stated priorities? Is this a case of two Ministries which are not able to work together? Is it a case of the Government saying one thing and doing another, or is it simply that people from ethnic minorities do not figure highly in the Government's priorities?

Mr. Patten : They figure very highly. I say three things to the hon. Gentleman. First, I share his interest in ensuring that all our children from ethnic minority communities are well educated. Secondly, he should reflect on whether all the money that was previously earmarked for section 11 funds in years past was well spent. Much of it was spent by labour local education authorities such as Avon on paying general teachers' salaries rather than section 11 teachers' salaries. Thirdly, while I agree that some teaching of mother tongue languages or English as a second language may be important for newly landed immigrant children, the first language of all our children should be English. That is what should be taught in our schools.

Sir Nicholas Fairbairn : As a Scotsman, may I say that the English language is the greatest and most necessary opportunity that one can give to a child, and the younger the better, if the child is to find employment and be impressive. The civil service has hardly shown us the way in its reports. Idiotic phrases such as "statementing process", as was used in question No. 5, show that the civil service is destroying English. It ought not to.

Mr. Patten : I shall refer the second part of my hon. and learned Friend's question to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, who has ministerial responsibility for the civil service. As for the first part, I regard it as critical that all our children are brought up to speak standard English clearly and with confidence ; that helps to level all our children up. Standard English should be spoken clearly and with confidence, whatever accent is used to deliver it. That includes the accent of my hon. and learned Friend.

Column 147

PRIME MINISTER

Engagements

Q1. Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 2 November.

The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

Mr. Hinchliffe : Is the Prime Minister aware that early next month Mrs. Margaret Humphreys will become the first British citizen outside the royal family to be awarded the prestigious Order of Australia medal for her work in rehabilitating victims of the British child migrants scheme? In recognition of that award, will the Prime Minister set up an independent public inquiry into the operation of the scheme until 1967 and the resulting appalling treatment of vast numbers of British children? In view of his professed commitment to open government, will the Prime Minister end the disgraceful Government cover-up of the issue once and for all?

The Prime Minister : I am certainly happy to congratulate Mrs. Humphreys on her award. I was not aware that that was the case, but I give her my warmest congratulations. As the hon. Gentleman will know--for I am aware that he has taken a great interest in the matter--the migration schemes to Australia and other countries were run at the time by respected national voluntary bodies. The Government's concern now is to ensure that former child migrants who want to make contact with their families are able to do so. Any concern about the treatment of the children in another country is essentially a matter for the authorities in that country.

Dame Jill Knight : In the light of the broadcast by Gerry Adams last week and the offence that it caused to a great number of people, will my right hon. Friend consider whether the arrangements for the broadcasting on our television screens of self-confessed terrorists and supporters of mass murderers should be revised?

The Prime Minister : Many people felt that the incident to which my hon. Friend refers stretched the present guidelines to the limit and perhaps beyond. That is a matter that perhaps we should examine.

Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister agree that, while it must be right for both parents to contribute properly to the maintenance of their children, the Child Support Agency is causing widespread anxiety and dismay by imposing a rigid and inflexible financial formula that often ignores the realities of people's lives? Will he institute an immediate review of the operation of the Child Support Act 1991?

The Prime Minister : The whole House recognises the need for both parents to contribute to the bringing up of their children--that is not a point of dispute between myself and the right hon. and learned Gentleman. The purpose of the Child Support Agency is to ensure that fathers who desert their children face up to their responsibilities. I know of the concerns that have been raised about that matter and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security is examining them.

Column 148

Mr. John Smith : Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that, in any examination of the system, account is taken of the fact that the formula appears to disregard a property settlement, which provides a home for children, and also the cost of exercising access? Should not those factors, at the least, be taken into account and will they be encompassed in any further considerations of the operation of the Child Support Act?

The Prime Minister : There are a number of matters to be considered, including the maintenance formula to which the right hon. and learned Gentleman refers. My right hon. Friend is aware, as I indicated a moment ago, of the concerns that have been raised and he will examine them.

Mr. John Smith : If further consideration is to be given, will the right hon. Gentleman look into what appears to be another possible fault in the system? Is it right that out of the £530 million that the agency is to raise in its first year, £480 million should go to the Treasury and only£50 million to the benefit of children? While recognising, of course, the legitimate interest of the taxpayer, does not that show a lack of balance in what is supposed to be a Child Support Act?

The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman knows that the main purpose of the Child Support Agency is to ensure that assistance is given by both parents towards their children. That is the purpose of the agency and that will continue to be its purpose in the future.

Mr. Lidington : In view of this morning's press comments about the attitude of Her Majesty's Government towards possible payments from the European social fund, will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to make the Government's position clear?

The Prime Minister : I have seen suggestions in the press in recent weeks that sums due from the social fund would not be paid. Those reports are misguided. It is my expectation that the £300 million figure that has been mentioned in those press reports will be taken up by authorities within the calendar year.

Q2. Mr. Hoyle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 2 November.

The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago.

Mr. Hoyle : Is the Prime Minister aware that the imposition of a guillotine on the Railways Bill is an affront to democracy-- [Interruption.] --which has caused disquiet not only on Opposition Benches, but on his Benches, too, because it will curtail discussion of vital subjects such as pensions, railcards, and British Rail's bid for franchises? Does not he realise that it will be seen by the public as a cheap, gerrymandering attempt to get an unpopular measure, which was introduced by his Government, through the House when it could have been debated fully in the two weeks up to the Queen's Speech?

The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman has been a Member of the House for a long time and I congratulate him on keeping a straight face while he asked that question. When the arrangements for consideration of Lords amendments to the Railways Bill were announced, no one suggested that the two days proposed were insufficient. The majority of the amendments that have been brought

Column 149

from another place are uncontroversial, many of them demonstrate the Government's positive responses to the points made in the Lords and all aspects of the proposals have been discussed exhaustively at all stages.

The hon. Gentleman neglected to mention that so far there have been more than 186 hours of debate, including 130 hours in this House alone--hardly a negation of democracy.

Q3. Mr. Brandreth : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 2 November.

The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

Mr. Brandreth : May I thank my right hon. Friend for his personal involvement in encouraging the Maryland bank of North America to bring its European headquarters to the city of Chester and with it the prospect of 1,000 new jobs for my constituents? Does my right hon. Friend agree that employment and employment prospects must now go to the top of the European agenda and that the British approach gets the right results--less regulation means more jobs?

The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right about the relationship between regulation and jobs. The greater the extent to which we can reduce both regulation from Brussels and domestic regulation, the greater will be the likelihood of increasing the number of jobs in the United Kingdom. I am delighted at the excellent news from Chester and I congratulate my hon. Friend and my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Employment and the Ministry for Industry on their part in obtaining that institution.

Mr. Galloway : Will the Prime Minister find time today to call for the court reports referred to in early-day motion 2534, standing in my name and that of other hon. Members, on the torture of a British citizen, Sulaiman Al-Adsani, by Sheikh Jabar Al-Sabah, a member of the Kuwaiti royal house? That matter is now to go before the courts in Kuwait. The torture, which consisted of the burning of 25 per cent. of the body of that British citizen and of his being held repeatedly under water in a swimming pool that was floating with dead bodies and being pistol-whipped and brutally beaten, is a serious matter. Given that the Al-Sabah family business was reinstated to power at the point of British arms and at much British sacrifice, does the Prime Minister think that it would be a worthwhile subject of discussion between him and the Government of Kuwait?

The Prime Minister : My understanding is that the matter is being dealt with by the courts of Kuwait, but in the light of what the hon. Gentleman has said, I shall look at the information available to us.

Q4. Mr. Hawkins : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 2 November.

The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Mr. Hawkins : May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his desire to get back to basics in education? Does he agree that it is essential to keep A-levels as a beacon of excellence at the top of secondary education, to concentrate on reading and writing in primary schools and to ensure that there is strong discipline in schools?

Column 150

The Prime Minister : I want to see us get back to basics in education, as in other subjects. We want to hear a good deal more of common sense and traditional values and rather less of the fashionable views that have so often offended parents and damaged education. I know that many teachers are concerned about the problem of discipline in schools and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education wishes to discuss with teachers what action can be taken.

Mr. Stevenson : In view of the collapse of the Government's policy on law and order, which has led to rocketing crime figures and equally record prison populations, does the Prime Minister agree with Mr. Derek Lewis that a return to that Victorian value, the prison ship, would be regrettable?

The Prime Minister : There is an internal contradiction in the hon. Gentleman's question. If he is right and our policy has collapsed, we would not be catching villains and our prisons would not be crowded. He should listen to what the chairman of the Police Federation said just eight days ago :

"There has been a lot of comment about prison in the last few days One fact is clear. Society must be protected from the small but vociferous minority who put two fingers up to the criminal justice system. They are cautioned or bailed simply to be let out again and to reoffend and reoffend again These criminals should be behind bars. By locking them up they will be unable to ruin other people's lives."

Those are my views as well.

Q6. Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 2 November.

The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

Sir Peter Tapsell : May I urge my right hon. Friend to be sceptical about the siren voices predictably suggesting to him and the Chancellor of the Exchequer that a major contribution can be made towards reducing the public sector borrowing requirement by relying on the future growth of our economy? That is the fairy gold school of economics, greatly beloved by Opposition politicians all over the world. Does he agree that it is important that, on Budget day, it should be seen that we are making an immediate, substantial and steady movement towards a reduction of our fiscal deficit?

The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right about the need to make a steady and consistent move to reduce our fiscal deficit. We have been looking at the range of Government expenditure to find out whether it is necessary ; if it is, whether it is being spent effectively ; and whether there is waste that we can cut. Those are propositions behind which all my right hon. and hon. Friends can unite, in stark contrast to the Opposition, who would throw taxpayers' money at every problem. There will be a series of ways to reduce the fiscal deficit : withholding public expenditure is one ; and growth and other factors will make a contribution.

Q7. Mr. O'Hara : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 2 November.

The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave some moments ago.

Mr. O'Hara : Yesterday in the House, the Government failed to refute a figure in a Department of Transport

Column 151

working paper of £1.15 billion extra subsidy that would be needed for British Rail after privatisation. That is considerably in excess of the sum that would be raised were VAT imposed on domestic fuel bills at a rate of 8 per cent. next year. Will the Prime Minister apologise to pensioners who will be shivering through next winter when he tells them that they will be contributing to the placing of not one more train on our rail tracks or one more passenger on those trains, but to a semblance of profitability in a sham of privatised railways?

Column 152

The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is talking total nonsense, as the House will have expected of him. We have made it clear on a number of occasions that we are looking at assistance to help vulnerable people with their heating costs during the winter. I remind the hon. Gentleman that matters such as special cold weather payments were never raised, provided or thought about by previous Governments.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page