SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION AND SCIENCE (Hansard, 3 February 1972)

§ Q6. Mr. Kaufman
asked the Prime Minister whether he will now dismiss the Secretary of State for Education and Science.

§ The Prime Minister
No, Sir.

§ Mr. Kaufman
Are we to take it from that answer that the right hon. Gentleman endorses the Secretary of State's petty-minded and vindictive interference with Manchester Corporation, which wishes to provide free hot drinks to children who receive free school dinners because they can no longer have milk? The Secretary of State has stepped in and forbidden this. Will the right hon. Gentleman now promise that he will preavent his right hon. Friend from meddling in Manchester's new plan to give these children these hot drinks at the charge of 1p per week?

§ The Prime Minister
The Manchester issue was a legal one and not a question of a policy decision by the Secretary of State. The legal advice which was received was that it was necessary for a local authority in those circumstances to make some charge.

§ Sir R. Cary
Will my right hon. Friend convey to his right hon. Friend the grateful thanks of thousands of people throughout the country for all she has done in regard to primary schools—surely the first priority in education?

§ The Prime Minister
I am sure that my right hon. Friend will appreciate what my hon. Friend has said, but the record of my right hon. Friend, in providing the largest ever building programme for replacing old primary schools, is a major achievement in education. At the same time, to have had the biggest ever building programme for polytechnics and other institutions of further education, to have 674 seen through the raising of the school-leaving age, which the party opposite abandoned, to have commissioned a major inquiry into teacher training and to have improved staffing standards are remarkable achievements in the 18 months that my right hon. Friend has been in office.

§ Mr. Edward Short
How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile the statement, which will appear in a number of places in a letter tomorrow, that the Government would set the local authorities free to take their own decisions with the constant, monotonous decisions of the Secretary of State for Education and Science to reject local authority reorganisation schemes? Is he aware that last week the Secretary of State rejected a very important part of Worcestershire's scheme and a very important part of Surrey's scheme?

§ The Prime Minister
As the right hon. Gentleman well knows, a responsibility is placed on the Secretary of State to examine schemes in the light of the criteria set down and to make a judgment upon them. That is a statutory responsibility placed upon her. At least she has not tried to bully local authorities to accept one scheme.

§ Mr. William Clark
Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Secretary of State's decision with regard to Whyteleafe School, retaining it as a grammar school, has pleased many parents in my constituency in East Surrey? Is he further aware that the decision to retain some grammar schools is in line with our promise to retain parental choice, which we on this side treat as of great importance?

§ The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir, we have always emphasised that the views of parents as well as those of teachers and local authorities should be taken into account.

§ Mr. Harold Wilson
Replying to the first question by my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Ardwick (Mr. Kaufman), the Prime Minister said that this was a purely legal matter, implying that if there were no legal difficulties the Secretary of State would not take this view. Is he aware that she introduced last year one of the filthiest Bills that we have ever had in this House, to prevent local authorities from providing 675 milk? If she could introduce that Bill to prevent them, could she not now introduce a Bill to do as my hon. Friend suggested?

§ The Prime Minister
I am glad to see that the support and backing for the hon. Member for Manchester, Ardwick (Mr. Kaufman) is still as good as ever. My right hon. Friend was asked to give the best advice possible, under the existing law, on the action proposed by the local authority—[Interruption.] Therefore, so far as it affects the local authority, she was bound to advise what the present position is: that some charge must be made by the local authority. The local authority can subsidise at the same time, but some charge has to be made by it.

§ Mr. Wilson
Would the right hon. Gentleman now answer my question? If the right hon. Lady could introduce that Bill last year to prevent councils supplying milk, why could she not clarify the law in this matter by introducing a Bill to enable them to do it?

§ The Prime Minister
Because we do not propose to change the responsibilities of local authorities in this way. We do not believe that they should have the power to dispense in this way without any charge at all. [HON. MEMBERS: "Resign!"] If the right hon. Gentleman had thought otherwise, presumably he would have changed the law himself. As it is, when we introduced the Education (Milk) Act we allowed a supply of free milk for every primary child up to the age of seven and for older children who needed it on medical grounds. The right hon. Gentleman abolished it for secondary education without any exemptions of any kind.