HC Deb 15 November 1963 vol 684 cc588-98

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Pym]

3.58 p.m.

Mr. John Cordle (Bournemouth, East and Christchurch)

The vital and important matters which have been discussed in the House today are a far cry from the matters which I wish to raise in connection with my own constituency but, nevertheless, of great importance to it. I am very grateful for the opportunity to speak on a matter relating to the 11-plus and grammar school problems in Bournemouth.

This matter was raised in the Adjournment debate on 2nd August, 1962, by my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, West (Sir J. Eden) and myself. The question of education is of national importance. The mental powers of our children are part of the nation's wealth to be guarded and not squandered. It is also a matter involving considerable expense and therefore of interest to every taxpayer and not least to the parents of children of school age. One of the great achievements of the past 12 years under the Conservative Government has been the building of 5,500 new schools, but, strange as it may seem, not a single new grammar school has been provided in my constituency, although Bournemouth has the highest intelligence quotient in the whole country.

It being Four o'clock, the Motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Pym.]

Mr. Cordle

We have two grammar schools, one for girls, built for 750 and now accommodating 850, the other for boys, built for 450 and enlarged piecemeal to accommodate 950 and literally bursting at the seams. Within the past fortnight, the headmaster has said that his sixth form includes about 280 pupils and the number is still rising.

Until 1952, satisfactory provision was made for grammar school entry by successful 11-plus candidates, but, after the appointment of the chief education officer in July of that year, a change of policy was immediately recommended and subsequently approved. The policy was not to increase grammar school accommodation but to increase the difficulty of entry to grammar schools by requiring those who had passed the standard 11-plus examination to take a supplementary and more difficult qualifying examination for grammar school entry. At the same time, a policy was introduced to provide G.C.E. courses in all secondary modern schools for those who would automatically be excluded from grammar schools by this artificially high standard of entry.

The effect of this semi-comprehensive policy was to reduce the percentage of the age group privileged to enjoy grammar school education from 25 to about 15 per cent., and, in one year, even to as low as 12 per cent.

It is true that our secondary modern schools in Bournemouth have exceptional G.C.E. results and the age at which many pupils are now leaving school has risen to a very satisfactory level. But the fact remains that in Bournemouth our percentage average intake for grammar school places is only 16 per cent, as against the suggested average of 25 per cent. It is a known fact that many other local education authorities whose I.Q. figure and G.C.E. results are in no way as good as Bournemouth's have a considerably greater number of grammar school places available.

I am raising this matter because of the serious discontent among parents whose children, after having reached the required standard for grammar school entrance, are simply refused admission to grammar school because there are no places for them. According to the Ministry's list No. 69 giving the numbers of 13-year-olds in different types of schools, Bournemouth, for the last two years for which figures are available, has been 46th out of 50 and 47th out of 49 in order of percentage of numbers in grammar schools among all those county borough councils which have not introduced some measure of official comprehensive education. Also in the same list are given the percentages of 13-year-olds staying on to 15 and 17 years of age in order to study for the G.C.E. O level and A level respectively. Bournemouth is top of the list for numbers staying on to study for O level and practically bottom of the list for the percentage of 15-year-olds staying on to study for A level. This seems to me a truly remarkable anomaly. Surely two reasons for the failure of the Bournemouth system to provide the levels of candidates for higher education recently envisaged by the Robbins Report are, first, That the secondary modern school courses, however good, are not adequate substitutes for a grammar school education, and secondly, the failure of the transfer system in Bournemouth, the importance of which has often been emphasised by the Minister of Education.

Because of the failure and breakdown of the transfer system, which my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education asked the local education authority to operate, I understand that, out of 70 children in 1962 who would have gone to grammar schools had they lived elsewhere, only two were transferred. The remaining 68 were kept in secondary schools. It seems that the local authority is not responding to the wishes of the people of the town and that the children are not receiving the kind of education which the 1944 Act intended them to have. Also, with the rising birth rate, this problem in Bournemouth will become greater and even more children will be deprived of this higher grade education because, in my view, of the ineptitude or intransigence of the education committee and its officers.

I understand that the transfer system has failed for several reasons. Headmasters of the various schools do not co-operate in the selection of pupils for upgrading, while the committee's decisions have been arrived at without any consultation with the parents. Consequently, a very small proportion of children are upgraded as against a considerably higher number who are downgraded from grammar schools to secondary schools. I am told that very few pupils have the opportunity of transferring to grammar schools until after they have passed the Ordinary levels of the G.C.E.

It was disappointment and disgust at this deplorable situation which led Councillor Holliday, the vice-chairman of the education committee, a man who had dedicated years of service to education in Bournemouth, to resign this September.

While the ultimate answer surely must be the provision of at least two new grammar schools in Bournemouth, meantime I submit that there must be an immediate inquiry into the working of the transfer system. I respectfully request the Minister to exercise his rights and to direct the council to make provision for the additional new grammar schools by the end of this year. May I ask my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary whether he is satisfied that the local education authority is complying with the provisions of the Education Act, 1944. If not, will he give me an undertaking that my constituents will no longer be deprived of their rights by what can only be described as an erring education committee and officer who stubbornly refuse to give Bournemouth the grammar school places to which it is entitled?

My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, West (Sir J. Eden) and myself carefully drew attention to this need in the debate in August, 1962, but it is evident that no steps have been taken locally. I am now convinced that only the intervention of the Minister will secure the desired result. To my mind there is a justifiable case for the local education authority to answer to the people of Bournemouth.

As I resume my seat, 1 should like to put forward a suggestion which could quickly right a serious wrong. Why not at once upgrade one of the secondary modern schools by converting its status into that of a grammar school?

4.10 p.m.

Sir John Eden (Bournemouth, West)

I do not wish to take up the time of the House, but I should like to say a couple of things briefly. So far as the remarks of my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East and Christchurch (Mr. Cordle) were directed towards stressing the urgency of the need for more grammar school places in Bournemouth, I wholeheartedly support him and endorse all that he has said. It is true that there is great need for more grammar school places there. This need has existed for some time. It has been known to my hon. Friend the Parliamen- tary Secretary also as a result of our debate in August, 1962, and this aspect of what my hon. Friend has said certainly merits examination.

As to my hon. Friend's remarks concerning transfers, however, I have looked into the charges which were recently made and I cannot agree with what my hon. Friend has said. I do not believe that the local authority is now operating the system unfairly. I do not believe that there is a kind of conspiracy between the head teachers and the education committee to try to do children out of their rightful places places which they have earned as a result of examinations. An attempt is being made to ensure that every aspect of a child's education up to the time when a transfer might be available is taken into consideration, and only those go forward who are able to benefit from the type of education which a grammar school provides.

4.12 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education (Mr. Christopher Chataway)

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Education has asked me to say that he regrets his inability to reply himself to this debate. But for engagements in Norfolk, he would have wished to do so, because he has taken a close interest in this affair. Shortly after returning to education as Minister last year, he made clear his position on this issue in the debate initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, West (Sir J. Eden). Much correspondence has flowed since then and recently, in August this year, my right hon. Friend saw parents who raised with him the effect of the authority's transfer arrangements on children who were involved in the eleven-plus difficulties of 1962.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East and Christchurch (Mr. Cordle) for providing the opportunity for this further discussion of secondary school organisation in Bournemouth, because I know that he and my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, West have throughout given considerable time, effort and thought to the problems of their constituents in this connection.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East and Christchurch has today been critical of the authority's policy. While I would not pretend to have been other than disturbed by last year's selection difficulties, it is only fair to say that Bournemouth has considerable educational achievements to its credit. One of the criteria, as my hon. Friend suggested, by which an education authority can expect to have its secondary system judged is the number of its children who stay on beyond the statutory school-leaving age. At present, 40 per cent, of all children entering the modern schools in Bournemouth stay on to the age of 16 or complete their fifth year. This year, of all the leavers from all types of secondary schools in the town, 73 per cent, of the boys and 61 per cent, of the girls have either completed their fifth year or reached the age of 16. Those figures are good by any standard. They are an important and convincing indication of success, particularly concerning the secondary modern schools.

I must make one other point clear. There is no question, as my hon. Friend in his closing passage seemed to suggest, of the authority's failing to provide the secondary education required by the 1944 Act. I will discuss presently ideas about the correct proportion for grammar school entry, but it must be recognised that this is a decision which, within broad limits, has to be taken locally. We have in this country a system which shares power between the Minister and the local education authorities. Here is a field in which local authorities have considerable freedom to make their own decisions. There cannot be any question, in the circumstances which prevail here, of my right hon. Friend directing the authority to adopt one policy rather than another.

That brings me to my hon. Friend's request that we should order some sort of inquiry into the transfer system in Bournemouth. That, I must tell him, is not a suggestion which I could accept. Last year my right hon. Friend asked the authority, as he reminded the House, to keep a special watch on all those children who had finished up in secondary modern schools after expecting at one time that they might be admitted to grammar schools. This the authority did, and submitted details to my right hon. Friend. As the school regulations require, he considered most carefully appeals by certain parents against the decisions of the authority in respect of transfers. What my right hon. Friend had to decide under those regulations was whether the authority's decisions were other than reasonable. This, clearly, is not the same thing as making the decision for himself over again. We do have to leave it to the authority to choose its own methods as long as it applies them fairly. Like my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, West my right hon. Friend was quite satisfied, after reading the authority's statement, that it had applied the chosen methods fairly, that there was not any favouritism or victimisation, and that considerable care had been taken. Although I cannot, therefore, agree to any general inquiry, it remains open, of course, to any parents to appeal to the Minister if they consider that their child has been, in the words of the regulations, refused admission to or excluded from a school on other than reasonable grounds. I now come to the more fundamental question my hon. Friend raises about the proportion of children in the town who ought to go to grammar schools. It can be said that Bournemouth is about average in this respect, and that in the last two years the percentage of entry has risen to over 20 per cent. Admittedly in one of those years it was for the very particular circumstances which give rise to this debate. It is true that the town has the same or a higher proportion of grammar school entrants than some of its near neighbours on the South Coast. Comparisons between areas are difficult; they can be misleading; there are great variations up and down the country; but it can be said that in terms of the number of 13-year-old pupils for whom local education authorities are financially responsible 16.9 per cent, of Bournemouth children were in grammar schools in January, 1963, compared with 16.7 per cent, for all English county boroughs.

When account is taken, however, not only of the maintained grammar schools but direct grant grammar schools, technical and independent schools, the total selected percentage for Bournemouth was 19.2, compared with 24.1 for all English county boroughs. In addition to that there are, as my hon. Friend suggested, grounds for thinking that the level of intelligence among Bournemouth children is such as to warrant the expectation that an unusually high proportion would be fitted for a grammar type of education. In determining the scale of selective provision in an area an authority should, of course, pay attention to a number of different factors, among which are the quality of the different types of school which it has already got, the educational level of its children, and—I certainly agree with my hon. Friend—the wishes of parents in the area. One of the advantages of a local over a centralised system of education is surely that an authority should be able to respond more sensitively to local wishes. In weighing up these factors in their different areas, authorities are evidently going to come to differing decisions. No one on this side of the House, at least, would suggest that there has to be uniformity, irrespective of local conditions or wishes; but my right hon. Friend has made it clear on a number of occasions that he favours a higher rather than a lower grammar school entry. I think he indicated last year to both my hon. Friends that he was not unsympathetic towards the case that they advanced then, and have advanced again today, for a higher grammar school intake in Bournemouth.

There are, as the authority always clearly recognised—and I agree with this—disadvantages in making the grammar school entry so big that it is impossible to run satisfactory courses for the late developer and the more academic child in the secondary modern school. Those who urge more selective places for Bournemouth should not overstate their case. To demand two more grammar schools for example—as did my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East and Christchurch—seems to me to be overstating the case. In an area where the school population is declining, surely it is pushing a reasonable case too far to suggest that there ought to be two more grammar schools, which would probably eliminate G.C.E. courses in the secondary-modern schools altogether.

But with social and educational improvements, one can expect, as the Robbins Report emphasises, that measured intelligence and educational attainments will rise substantially. All educational planning should take this into account. There are great dangers today in carrying a mental picture of some limited static unalterable pool of ability.

I finish with a general point. I have readily conceded that there is a case for higher grammar school entries than that allowed for by Bournemouth's policy. But wherever the lines are drawn, whether between grammar and secondary modern schools or, indeed, between comprehensive and E.S.N. schools, it must be recognised that children who fall on either side of that line will be of virtually indistinguishable ability. Their education and the opportunities opened to them should therefore be similar. This is an ideal towards which our educational system has made great progress in recent years. I hope that in the course of this argument in Bournemouth it will not be thought that irrevocable decisions about a child's future are being taken in Bournemouth at the eleven-plus stage, or worse, that they ought to be taken at this stage. I know that the authority and its teachers are keen to ensure that they are not. I think that my hon. Friend will agree that this is of as much importance as anything else that we have discussed today.

Mr. Cordle

May I make the position clear in relation to the request for two more grammar schools? Does my hon. Friend agree that there is room for more pupils in a school with a sixth form of 280? How are we to cope with the question of upgrading grammar school girls when the school is full almost to bursting point? Regarding the transfer scheme, can my hon. Friend tell us whether it is working when we have had transferred this year two out of 70 who were eligible?

Mr. Chataway

On the transfer system, I have explained that my right hon. Friend looked at this very carefully and was satisfied that the methods that the authority had chosen were being operated fairly. On the question of expanding grammar school provision, I repeat that if two new grammar schools were to be provided in Bournemouth, where there is the prospect of a declining population, it would mean a very high proportion of grammar school places indeed, and it would almost certainly mean that there would be no G.C.E. work being done in the modern schools at all.

Having said that, I hope that I have made it clear that I am not at all unsympathetic to the case my hon. Friend is advancing for a higher grammar school intake, but what I have had to stress is that the initiative for any expansion of that kind would have to come from the local education authority.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-seven minutes past Four o'clock.