HC Deb 26 May 1960 vol 624 cc670-4
34. Mr. Blyton

asked the Minister of Education which secondary modern schools submitted by the Durham Local Authority for inclusion in its 1954–55 building programme were not approved for inclusion by his Department.

Sir D. Eccles

One at Peterlee and the other at Barnard Castle. In fact, only four out of the ten projects approved for that year were started on time.

Mr. Blyton

Could the Minister tell me how many denominational schools needed reorganisation in Durham and how much it would have cost in 1954–55? When he made the recent attack on Durham County Council was he attacking their efforts as well?

Sir D. Eccles

I shall have to ask the hon. Member to put down a Question about the number of denominational schools, because I do not carry the figures in my head.

35. Mr. Blyton

asked the Minister of Education why the Telling Heworth, the Hartlepool, West View and the Birtley/Chester-le-Street secondary modern schools were not included in the Durham Local Education Authority's building programme 1955–56 although submitted for inclusion by the Durham Local Education Authority.

Sir D. Eccles

Because twelve other projects were considered to be more urgently needed. Of these twelve, only one was started on time.

Mr. Blyton

Could the Minister tell me what his inspectors' comments were on the state of overcrowding in Durham, the Hartlepool and Birtley areas, and the difficulties which teachers are experiencing in those areas? Does he not consider that, in the light of the fact that his Department has cut the programme for Durham County Council over the last seven years, he should be decent and apologise to Durham County Council?

Sir D. Eccles

I shall write to the hon. Member about what Her Majesty's inspectors have said, but of course it is very true that the delays in the building programme have added to the difficulties.

36. Mr. Stones

asked the Minister of Education which secondary modern schools submitted by the Durham Local Education Authority for inclusion in its 1956–57 building programme were deleted by his Department.

Sir D. Eccles

Nine schools, at Hartlepool, Stockton, West Auckland, Egglescliffe, Peterlee, Spennymoor, Durham, Ushaw Moor, and Seaham Harbour. The large carry-over of unstarted projects from the previous year's programme made it necessary to introduce a starting date procedure. As a result, only two out of nineteen approved projects were started in 1956–57.

Mr. Stones

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House how many all-age schools would have been eliminated had he been prepared to accept the modern school building programme of the county council?

Sir D. Eccles

It is no good accepting a programme if the authority does not carry it out.

37. Mr. Stones

asked the Minister of Education how many secondary modern schools were deleted from the Durham Local Education Authority's building programme for 1957–58 by his Department; and what percentage these schools formed of the number of secondary modern schools submitted by Durham that year.

Sir D. Eccles

Fifteen proposals were submitted of which twelve, or 80 per cent., were not approved.

The large carry-over of unstarted projects from the previous year's programme made it necessary to continue the starting date procedure introduced a year earlier. As a result, only one out of three approved projects was started in 1957–58.

Mr. Stones

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the replies to my Questions are a sufficient indication in themselves of the determination of the Durham County Council—[Laughter.]—to make up the leeway which occurred during the depression years between the two world wars? Is it not a fact that a Tory Minister is holding the county council back to some extent?

Sir D. Eccles

If the hon. Member is patient he will see that the story gets better.

38. Mr. Fernyhough

asked the Minister of Education the names of the secondary modern schools submitted by the Durham Local Education Authority for inclusion in its 1958–59 building programme and deleted by his Department.

Sir D. Eccles

Five schools, at Billing-ham, Peterlee, Ryton, Stockton and Whickham. At that time there were large arrears of earlier projects not yet started, but during the year the Authority began to make better progress. It started six out of sixteen approved projects.

Mr. Fernyhough

Is it not true, even though hon. Members opposite may laugh, that Ministers of this Administration have deliberately forbidden local authorities to go ahead with school building and that there was a period when this Government called a moratorium on it? Ought not the Minister, occupying his present office, to accept the responsibility for the shortfall in his Administration rather than blame it on people whom he denied the opportunity to do the job when they wanted to do it?

Sir D. Eccles

I think that the hon. Member will agree that if the Minister gives the local authorities schools to build, it is then up to the local authority to build them.

Mrs. White

Surely it is not as simple as all that. If the Minister says that the arrangements in this county have not been satisfactory, he has a staff, including architects and inspectors, and it is surely his responsibility at the Ministry of Education, if he thinks that there are these difficulties, to make certain that something is done to put them right.

Sir D. Eccles

They are getting much better. If Question No. 51 is reached the hon. Lady will see the result.

39. Mr. Fernyhough

asked the Minister of Education what percentage of the Durham Local Education Authority's secondary modern school building programme, 1959–60, was deleted by his Department.

Sir D. Eccles

Twelve projects were submitted, of which seven, or 58 per cent., were not approved. Despite improved progress, seven projects from previous years remained unstarted in April, 1959.

Mr. Fernyhough

May we have an assurance from the right hon Gentleman that next year when we ask similar Questions he will not blame us for not building the schools which he would not give us permission to build this year?

Sir D. Eccles

I 'had very much hoped that Question No. 51 would be reached, because from the reply to it the hon. Member will get comfort. He will see that the Durham authority is now building very much better.

Mr. Greenwood

Is it not a fact that, in spite of all the Minister's jibes, the provision of additional school places in the last five years in Durham has been very satisfactory?

Sir D. Eccles

I am not jibing at the county council. I have been asked for information, which I have given.

Mr. Turton

Can my right hon. Friend say how this Durham record compares with the record of the neighbouring North Riding County Council?

Sir D. Eccles

I should have to look into that.

Mr. Chetwynd

As one of the Members very closely affected by this, may I give notice that I shall do my best to raise the matter on the Adjournment?

Forward to