HL Deb 18 July 2000 vol 615 cc835-41

162A Line 35, at end insert— ("(3D) On an application by the local education authority in whose area the school is situated, the Secretary of State shall direct the person who is to conduct the school under subsection (1) to agree arrangements for governance, pupil admissions, pupil support and monitoring pupil achievements with the local education authority.").

5.30 p.m.

Baroness Sharp of Guildford

My Lords, I beg to move Amendment No. 162A. I thank the Minister for the reply that she has already given to my amendment. However, in discussing the amendment, I wish to speak more generally about city academies. As the Minister rightly pointed out, this is the first time we have had the opportunity to debate them in this House.

I should like to begin by discussing the more general issue. We on these Benches are sympathetic to the measures which the Government are putting forward which seek to improve the position of inner city schools in disadvantaged areas which have a disproportionately large number of people with all the multiple problems of poverty and who live in rundown communities. We have long argued that these schools should be in the front line of the fight against poverty and need more resources, more talented teachers and innovative programmes.

However, we see these proposals for city academies not as part of a co-ordinated strategy on the part of the Government to cope with these issues but, regretfully, as another ad hoc piece of legislation and another gimmick adding to an already complex situation for these schools. We already have community schools, foundation schools, Church schools and city technology colleges, all of which have different set-ups, different relations with local authorities and different governance systems.

On Report in the other place the Secretary of State made it quite clear that the new academies were not, like city technology colleges, to be placed outside the local authority system. On the contrary, he said, City academies are not like the old city technology colleges—15 of them parachuted in like cuckoos in the nest, for good or ill … I have made it clear that the admissions code will hold, and that schools cannot be parachuted in … It is clear—and I shall make it explicit in the funding agreement—that city academies will co-operate with the admissions forum and seek to work in partnership with other schools in the neighbourhood. This is a collaborative, not a competitive, approach".—[Official Report, Commons, 27/6/00; cols. 751–54.] The noble Baroness echoed the words of the Secretary of State in that regard. However, the question then arises: why is this legislation necessary? The Secretary of State already has sufficient powers to set up such city academies without having to pass special measures to set them up as, in effect, city technology colleges with a wider remit to enable them to be arts colleges and not just technology colleges. The key issue is that of independent sponsors whose only function is to contribute 20 per cent of capital funding. All revenue funding is to come from the LEAs. However, in return for their 20 per cent capital contribution, the sponsors have the freedom to set up their own management structures and processes.

The initial draft prospectus had little to say about local government except that the sponsors would liaise with local education partners, including the LEA and other schools. But the revised prospectus which has been issued more recently has shown that the Government expect that city academies will be established with the consent of local education authorities. We take that on board. It contains reference to local government—including encouraging sponsors to invite the LEA to nominate a representative to the governing body—and to the LEA role in identifying potential schools and proposing closures. A government amendment at the Commons Report stage requires the Secretary of State to consult with LEAs about the establishment of city academies. This is one of the amendments we are considering.

However, despite this requirement to consult and the emphasis on partnership, there remain doubts. A requirement to consult does not mean that the Secretary of State will react to the concerns of local authorities. City academies will essentially remain outside the sphere of local government and, consequently, separated from the integrated range of services that local government offers. The amendment seeks to address these concerns. If city academies are meant to be at the heart of the community they need to have community representation on the governing body.

Arrangements for governance will allow for community representation on that governing body—not only a single representative nominated by the LEA. Arrangements for pupil admissions will ensure that admissions are fair—with no interviewing—and inclusive and will reflect the local population. Arrangements for pupil support will ensure that children in city academies will have access to the same support arrangements that operate in LEAs, including welfare benefits, support for children at risk of exclusion and education welfare officers. Arrangements for monitoring pupil achievements outside the Ofsted school inspection system are essential to the Government's policy objective of raising standards. The LEA should have the ability to monitor the achievements of all local schools provided through their financing.

Moved, That Amendment No. 162A, as an amendment to Commons Amendment No. 162, be agreed to.—(Baroness Sharp of Guildford.)

Baroness Blotch

My Lords, the noble Baroness said that she was sorry that we were unable to debate these proposals earlier. However, I am deeply saddened that I was not shown the courtesy of being given notice that these amendments were being laid in another place; nor did I receive the consultation papers. I have had to go around carrying out detective work to obtain information about what the Government were doing. It is not unusual—I have made this complaint before—but I wish to register it for the record.

My noble friend Lord Baker, who is in his place, developed city technology colleges. They have been hugely successful—so successful, in fact, that the Government have not only retained them but are building on that experience. My noble friend Lord Harris of Peckham has been incredibly generous in respect of his CTC, and many other people have been equally generous.

Perhaps I may ask the noble Baroness a number of questions. First, following consultation, but without the consent of an LEA and without the consent of the governing body of a school which is destined to become a new academy, can the Government set objections aside and press on with the development of a city academy anyway? In which case, will every child in the school have the right to become a pupil of the new city academy? My understanding of a reply given to a question in another place is that Estelle Morris referred to "some" children having a right to transfer to the new city academy. If that is the case, what happens to those children who do not?

It is said that city academies will be all-ability schools which cater for pupils who are 11 to 16 or 11 to 18 years' old, according to the pattern of local provision; so, too, do all comprehensives, city technology colleges and many other schools. It is said that they will be situated in major urban areas; well, such schools are in such areas. It is said that schools will be at the heart of their communities, sharing their facilities with other schools and the wider community; all schools are at the heart of their communities and many of them share their facilities with the wider community. Schools will be registered as independent schools, subject to inspection by Ofsted, and charge no fees; that, of course, is the case with CTCs.

Schools will have state-of-the-art facilities, with sponsors making a contribution; that, of course, is the case with CTCs—but why should it be only these schools with state-of-the-art facilities? What makes them distinctive? They will be owned and run by sponsors; so are CTCs. They will be schools with a broad curriculum but with special emphasis in an area of the curriculum such as science, languages, arts or sport; our specialist schools do that. They will be schools developing in their pupils the qualities of enterprise, self-reliance and responsibility which young people need for adult life; I would hope that that is a mission for all of our schools. They will be schools aiming to secure the highest possible standards of achievement, never satisfied with past levels of achievement; I hope that also applies to all other schools. What is distinctive about the city academies when compared to city technology colleges and our specialist schools?

5.45 p.m.

Lord Baker of Dorking

My Lords, earlier I was critical of the Government's policy on grammar schools; on this occasion I fully support the proposals tabled by the noble Baroness. I think these academies are an excellent idea, for several reasons. First, they will be based in the inner city areas, which, as everyone recognises, present the most difficult educational problems. Secondly, they will be supported by local industry—in fact the Government expect £2 million per college to be contributed. I hope that they will be successful in that. When we set up the city technology colleges we raised some £44 million for the first 15 colleges. For me, it was quite easy money to raise. I hope that the noble Baroness will find it as easy to raise money from industry and commerce as we did.

Thirdly, they will be independent of local government. I certainly congratulate the Government on this. When I introduced the technology colleges I was lambasted for this particular proposal. The original CTCs were independent of local authorities and that gave them the freedom and flexibility they needed. They could experiment with timetabling; with opening and closing schools at different hours; with varying the holidays of the year and so on. The city academies should have the same degree of freedom.

The fourth reason I welcome the academies is that the Government have done something that I did not perhaps have the percipience to do: they have taken powers—which, if I had introduced them, would have been accused of being draconian—to transfer the property of schools at no charge to the city academies. When I came to set up the city technology colleges, the schools said "Our school is worth £4 million or £5 million for development value; please give us £4 million or £5 million". The Government have sensibly taken these draconian measures—which I fully support—to transfer the schools. That is not a loss to the local community; it is transferring an existing educational asset, which is defunct and not operating correctly, into an educational asset which is properly run.

I am very glad to support the Government. As I say, the academies will be virtually indistinguishable from city technology colleges, whatever oratory and clever words the Government may use. I do not complain about that. I always feared that when the Government came to power in 1997 they would stand by their original proposal to abolish the CTCs. Not only have they not done that; they have expanded them into a network of 700 colleges. Collectively, they produce some of the finest schools in the country. I hope that the academies will be a considerable addition to them.

Lord Roberts of Conwy

My Lords, perhaps I may briefly note the fact that Wales is entirely excluded from the proposals relating to city colleges and academies. I can think only of one reason for that—namely, that the National Assembly did not foresee certain circumstances in which they would be needed. In that case, we should all remind ourselves of a saying I once heard Nye Bevan utter—namely, that one of our troubles is that we plan for society as it is rather than for society as we would wish it to be.

I welcome very much the youth services support referred to in the last group of amendments, but I am somewhat surprised that this initiative is not being made applicable to Wales as well. What is good enough for England is usually good enough for Wales.

Baroness Blackstone

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, and to the noble Lords, Lord Baker and Lord Roberts, for their support for this idea. City academies are intended as a radical solution to very intractable problems. Perhaps I may say to the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, that they are in no sense a gimmick. They are designed to try to find our way through a problem with which successive governments have found it difficult to deal. Let us be clear. They are not the only solution. And nor are we intending to impose them on unwilling communities.

Perhaps I may say to the noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, that it would be unthinkable for us to set up city academies against local opposition. In most cases the LEA or the school itself will publish the proposals which lead to a school closing so that a city academy can be set up. In very rare cases the Secretary of State could use his powers under the School Standards and Framework Act to propose the closure of a school which is already seriously failing. But, in doing that, he would want to take account of local views.

The noble Baroness asked whether pupils who have been at a school which is being closed, with a city academy being formed in its place, would go on as pupils in the city academy. We certainly expect that the vast majority of pupils at schools replaced by city academies will transfer to the city academy. However, it would be a mistake to try to lay down hard and fast rules now which could not possibly take account of particular cases. For example, the establishment of a city academy may be part of a reorganisation where several schools are closing or changing size. Two schools might be merged and be replaced by a single city academy. Where that happened, pupils might prefer to transfer to another local school rather than to the city academy. Parents might also choose to send their children to a school other than the city academy. What we are clear about is that we do not want to create surplus places.

The noble Baroness asked about the difference between CTCs and city academies. The noble Lord, Lord Baker, was perfectly happy to have city academies that would be slightly different from CTCs. The first respect in which they will be different is that, unlike CTCs, the creation of city academies will not create surplus places and in that sense threaten other schools in the area. Secondly, and perhaps even more importantly, they will have fair and open admissions systems. CTCs were set up able to interview applicants and take into account rather subjective criteria, such as parental commitment. Finally, city academies will be required to use their specialist status to benefit other schools too. Those are all important differences.

Perhaps I may respond to what the noble Lord, Lord Roberts, said about Wales. The provision does not apply to Wales because the National Assembly decided that it did not want these powers. The noble Lord will have to go back to his colleagues in the National Assembly on that point.

I return to the points raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp. I can assure the House that governance arrangements for city academies will be transparent and will ensure that they do reflect best practice from the maintained and independent sectors on all the key issues—from child protection to financial probity, the involvement of parents, and so on. I have already given an assurance about admissions arrangements. The LEA will also have the ability to make representations to the Secretary of State should it have concerns about them. I accept that proper arrangements for pupil support are essential and we will ensure that the funding agreement for each city academy gives proper attention to that. But city academies are to have the freedom to devise new solutions. That is the whole point of them. We do not want them to be constrained in what they are doing.

For all schools, working to ensure that pupils achieve their full potential is by far the most important task. We know that careful monitoring of pupil achievements is the key to achieving high standards. That work must be first and foremost the responsibility of the school itself. The prospectus makes it clear that city academies will set targets against agreed performance indicators.

I hope that, taken together with my earlier comments, the noble Baroness will feel that we have given adequate reassurances about our plans for city academies. In particular, I hope that the House will agree that our plans give city academies the freedom they need to be truly innovative and that they also protect the interests of the young people who will attend them and the other schools in the area. With that in mind I trust that the noble Baroness will feel able to withdraw her amendment and join the House in agreeing with the Commons amendments.

Baroness Sharp of Guildford

My Lords, I thank the Minister for her reassurances on these issues. It is clear that if city academies are to succeed they have to be in the heart of their local communities and work extremely closely with their local education authorities. I take on board the Minister's assurances that that will be the case. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment No. 162A, as an amendment to Commons Amendment No. 162, by leave, withdrawn.

On Question, Motion agreed to.