| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
11 pm
Miss Widdecombe: I wish to address amendment No. 165, standing in my name, dealing with the gagging clause that the Government have seen fit to insert in the Bill, which prevents a grammar school or its governing body from campaigning or proselytising during the period of a ballot. It is odd that we will have a vote which may not be preceded by a debate among those most concerned
in the outcome. Not only do we not know the rules that will govern the ballot, but the most interested parties--the ones whose voices need to be heard locally--will not be allowed to campaign during the ballot.
In my constituency, there are five grammar schools, and they will not be able to state the case for their own continuation. The Conservative county council--which wishes to continue with grammar schools--will likewise not be allowed to put its case. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon (Mr. Curry) said, there is nothing to stop any organisation from arguing general principles nationally, but there will not be that opportunity locally--because, under the Bill, there may not be a proper debate.
When this matter was raised in Committee, the Minister's response was that the Government did not want public money used to promote large-scale campaigns during a ballot. That is perfectly fair. All my amendment does is to put that in the Bill. At the moment, the Bill says that bodies concerned "shall not" publish any material, give any financial aid or otherwise campaign. I am simply proposing to add three little words to "shall not"--"at public expense". That leaves heads, governing bodies, parent-teacher associations and anybody who has an interest in the outcome of the ballot free to make the arguments known.
The parents, teachers, heads and governing bodies of Kent would have been offended by the mirth that has been exhibited by Labour Members this evening in discussing something of major importance to them and to the future of their children.
Miss Widdecombe:
I shall give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Faversham and Mid-Kent (Mr. Rowe).
Mr. Rowe:
I am flattered that my right hon. Friend has prioritised me. If I understand her correctly, she is suggesting that if, for example, a school's governing body wanted to have some influence on the debate, it should resign en bloc from its position as the governing body. It would then be entirely free to campaign. This seems to be nonsense. I have no doubt that people listening to the arguments that the body puts forward would rather know that it is associated with the school than finding that it is, in some curious way, forced to conceal it.
Miss Widdecombe:
That is not what I am suggesting, but it is the only possible reaction to the situation that the Government have created in the Bill. People will look for ways around the measure. My amendment is straightforward, and I am amazed that the Minister is not embracing it. Apparently it deals with his objection, which is the use of public money.
Mrs. Browning:
Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in Committee, we referred to the amount of publicity that trade unions could produce in such a ballot? The Minister said that they were external bodies, and nothing to do with him. Experience of grant-maintained schools, however, has taught us that they would have considerable influence, given their resources. The bodies to which my right hon.
Miss Widdecombe:
My hon. Friend is right, and she does well to remind the House of that exchange in Committee, and the deductions that can be made from it.
I tabled the amendment at the direct request of the head of one of my grammar schools, with the support of other heads of grammar schools. They were severely concerned that there would be a vote but that there would be no input in the debate from the grammar schools.
Mr. Damian Green (Ashford):
Is my right hon. Friend aware that parents as well as heads and governing bodies want to take part in the ballots? That is shown by the fact that, next year, both the grammar schools in my constituency--Highworth school for girls and the Norton Knatchbull school for boys--will have to impose a further entry condition because of their popularity among a wider and wider range of parents in and around Ashford.
Miss Widdecombe:
Indeed. I heard sedentary comments--to which, of course, I should not respond--asking whether I was afraid of the outcome of the ballot. I refer hon. Members to what happened when a BBC crew conducted a vox pop in the streets of Maidstone on the continuation of grammar schools--the response was 100 per cent. in favour. Interestingly, the crew did not approach people who looked as if they had children who were currently at the grammar schools; it approached those with tiny children--people who certainly did not look as though they had had a grammar school education. Nevertheless, 100 per cent. wanted to keep the grammar schools.
Mr. Fallon:
Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Miss Widdecombe:
Now, of course, I shall certainly give way.
Mr. Fallon:
Last, and quite clearly least.
On that point, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the fact that, by definition, some of the people who were interviewed would have voted for the Labour party at the general election? Likewise, some of the people who will be disfranchised at those schools will be members of the Labour party. Will she comment on the absence of support for Labour's proposal from Labour Members who represent Kent?
Miss Widdecombe:
That is a telling point. I must tell my hon. Friend that I chose my two other hon. Friends before him purely on a geographical basis--confronted with an embarrassment of riches, I had to find some way in which to select, so I chose on a distance criterion. He is, of course, right--both Labour and Liberal supporters wanted to maintain the grammar schools.
Mr. Dawson:
If the schools are as popular across the political spectrum as the right hon. Lady says, what on earth is she worried about?
Miss Widdecombe:
If the hon. Gentleman had been paying attention in class, he would have heard me say that
The Labour Government have let down the people of Kent. During the general election, I was repeatedly told by people who claimed to be Labour supporters, and whom I had no reason to disbelieve, "It's all right. They won't do anything to the grammar schools when they get in--the grammar schools are safe with them." I reckon that many parents in Kent now bitterly rue the way they voted in the election.
Mr. Brady:
I thank my right hon. Friend for giving way. I hope that she appreciates the fact that I am helpfully intervening in strict geographical order.
The hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre (Mr. Dawson) made a telling point, on which I should be interested to hear him expand. If he believes that comprehensive schools are so popular, I presume that he will support amendment No. 177, which would give parents of children in those schools the chance to vote on whether the comprehensive system should be maintained.
Miss Widdecombe:
Indeed, my hon. Friend puts an unarguable proposition to the hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre (Mr. Dawson).
Mr. Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent):
Will the right hon. Lady explain how she can tell whether someone has been to a grammar school?
Miss Widdecombe:
I could not tell, but the BBC crew reckoned they could, so the hon. Gentleman had better put the question to them.
The BBC crew made a point of approaching a range of people of different ages--people who looked as though they might have children at secondary school or at primary school, and people who looked as though they came from a range of professions and occupations--and 100 per cent., from all political persuasions, wanted to keep grammar schools.
That view will be reflected in future votes in Kent. Where are the Kent Labour Members? What are they saying on behalf of the parents who want to keep grammar schools in Kent? We have heard from the hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre, and the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) often shouts out interventions, but their constituencies are a long way from Kent. Where are the Labour Members from Kent?
Mr. Rowe:
Kent has more grammar schools than any other county, and a proud record of fighting to defend their right to remain as grammar schools. That battle, which had to be fought not only against Labour but, sadly, against the Conservative Government, was fought successfully.
We strongly believe that we have nothing to fear from a ballot. In many respects, the nature of the ballot that is imposed on us does not matter much. It is perfectly clear that the Labour Government have absolutely no idea what sort of ballot they ought to run. They are full of internal contradictions and paradoxes, and they will not find it
possible to run a credible ballot on the lines that have so far been suggested. Kent is ready to go along with whatever ballot they decide on.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |