| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
4.45 pm
Secondly, I believe that the Department's exercise rests on a false premise--that it is possible to predict in the long term the demand for places in a village school. In my experience, it is not possible to make such long-term--or even medium-term--predictions about demand for places.
The St. Mark's Church of England infants school in the village of Eccles, which was part of my constituency before the boundary changes, was once considered for closure. However, only last year, my right hon. Friend the Member for South-West Norfolk (Mrs. Shephard), as Secretary of State and Education and Employment, authorised the upgrading of that school to a full-scale primary school, because of the influx of people into the village and the surrounding areas.
That graphically illustrates the fact that the demand for places at a school can vary enormously over 10 or 20 years. I believe that the Bill's provisions for the protection of rural schools need strengthening, so I warmly support the new clause.
Mr. Willis:
I think that the Minister will, on reflection, come to regret his statement before the countryside rally to prevent the people of North Tyneside from marching on his home later that day. He made a foolish promise--if he meant what he said, the Government should support the new clause, as it would bear out what he said on television, and the commitment that he made in his press release. We do not support the new clause, however, and perhaps the Government will agree with our position.
The right hon. Member for Tonbridge and Malling (Sir J. Stanley) made a passionate plea for rural schools in Kent--any hon. Member whose constituency contains a large number of rural schools could have made almost the same speech. I doubt whether any hon. Member--especially those who represent rural areas--does not accept that the protection of village schools is important, provided that they meet appropriate educational standards and are supported by the local community.
What has happened in the past four or five years, however, does not bear out what the Conservatives now say. Since 1992, 450 village schools were closed, and--until the Minister gave his commitment--thousands were under threat because of the lack of resources. Many small village schools--especially those with fewer than 25 pupils--are concerned that they have to live on a year-by-year basis.
The new clause will do nothing to preserve village schools. It would undermine the Government's attempt to create a level playing field. All schools, be they urban or rural, small or large, should be given the same consideration when a local education authority proposes closure. The Government's intention in the legislation was to make the decisions closer to the people, giving local education authorities a duty to plan for places and to make proper recommendations on closure.
The issue of the closure of small village primary schools is very real, as is the issue of surplus places. It is clearly nonsense to include the issue of surplus places in the whole of an LEA's provision in a measure designed to apply to small rural primary schools.
If we are to maintain those schools, we have to accept that there will be surplus places in them, unless there is expansion in particular villages. The communities in many of the affected areas--especially the Yorkshire dales, near my constituency--remain relatively stable: numbers fluctuate, but they do not go up or down by huge leaps or bounds.
All schools should be treated the same, and LEAs should be obliged to make rational decisions close to the people. We would prefer it to be up to the LEA, in consultation with local communities, to make decisions about the closure of schools, be they small rural primary schools or large urban secondary schools, on the basis of standards, of what is required for the community, and of what is financially acceptable to the authority.
Mrs. May:
The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) summed up the debate about the new clause when he said that, if the Minister meant what he said in the media about small village schools, he would support it.
The new clause is designed to put into effect what the Minister stated was the Government's policy. I hope that he will be able to put us out of our misery by saying that he does indeed support it, but I have a suspicion that he may not do so. That says an awful lot about the Government's attitude to rural communities and the cynical way in which he was willing to appear on television at the drop of a hat to announce a new policy to pacify those who are genuinely concerned about the Government's general attack on the rural community.
In Committee, we debated the removal of the right of parish and town councils to appoint governors to the governing bodies of their local schools. That is an issue about which my local parish and town councils are extremely concerned. They have written to me to point out that the school is an essential part of the local community, as is the parish council. It is important to retain the heart of the local community, especially in dispersed rural communities, which is represented by the village school.
The Minister tried to placate people in rural areas by suggesting that the Government are adopting a more helpful policy towards village schools than was intended when the Bill was first drafted. There are 14 new clauses and well over 100 amendments on the amendment paper today. More than half are Government amendments, yet nowhere in them is there an attempt by the Government to place on a statutory basis the new policy that they claim, hand on heart, to have adopted. That says more than anything else about the Minister's press release and appearance on television. The policy he announced is a policy in words only. If it were not, the Government would support the new clause.
The Government should think again about rural schools, which play a key part in the community. They may find that the issue comes into conflict with their announcements on infant class sizes. They have said that, if a 31st child is due to come into a village school, either he or she could go to another rural school, which may indeed have been closed, or the money could be given to the first school to accommodate that child. They will have to think carefully about the interaction of their policy on rural schools with their commitment on infant class sizes.
If he is serious about the policy that he announced in the national media, the Minister should accept new clause 13 with open arms, and thank the Opposition for having put into words, for inclusion in the Bill, a policy that he claims to support.
Mr. St. Aubyn:
My hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning) wondered why the
In whatever areas the unions have opined regarding the Bill--on partnership provision between LEAs and independent schools, for example, or on terms and conditions--the Government bend to what they are told behind closed doors; but when it comes to trying to pacify rural areas, it is a different story. Unless the Minister can spin a convincing tale, we will draw the natural conclusion that what he said was all for effect, with no real meaning.
I am delighted to support the new clause moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton. It was a previous Angela--Dame Angela Rumbold--who, as a schools Minister in the previous Government, first outlined a clear Government pledge in support of village schools. She did so in February 1987, which I remember because I was making my first attempt to enter Parliament. Despite my lack of success on that occasion, we all learned the importance of village schools.
The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) spoke of a level playing field. In a rural area, such as the part of Cornwall in which I lived for 10 years, there is no level playing field. It sometimes takes a wider view, which may come from a departmental angle rather than from a local education authority, to balance the needs of a rural area against the diktats of the pure numbers and costs of keeping a school open.
In the light of the epic announcement last week of the ending of outdoor lavatories at schools, how many of the schools involved are village primary schools?
I know from experience of village schools in my constituency that they are often on a knife edge because of their financial situation. As my hon. Friend the Member for Maidenhead (Mrs. May) said, many will face particular pressure because of the Government's commitment on class sizes.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |