§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Gummer.]
12.23 am§ Mr. David Young (Bolton, East)This debate is primarily about parents, teachers and children. It is about the ending of the uncertainty of parents, the future of the children in Bolton and the restoring of the morale of the excellent teaching staff that we have in Bolton. It is also, to quote an editorial in the Bolton Evening News—which by no stretch of the imagination could be considered to be a Left-wing journal—about the need to end the present educational hotch-potch.
While the debate refers to comprehensive reorganisation, let us be quite clear that, whatever the Minister decides, the reorganisation of schools in Bolton will have to take place. If there is a belated or adverse decision, the reorganisation will have to be more rather than less.
As the Minister is aware, the Department received the scheme from Bolton on 3 October. Discussions had been taking place between his officials and Bolton council officials since August. I emphasise that already in the borough we have comprehensive organisation in both Turton and Westhoughton. The denominational schools are organised comprehensively. Thus the authority's plan seeks to rationalise the contradictory and conflicting educational systems in the borough. Not only is the proposal endorsed by the duly elected council, but it has carried with it the endorsement of the teachers' unions, the chamber of trade and commerce and the Bolton council for community relations.
The overwhelming argument for the scheme is educational. It is basically designed to make the most effective use of manpower, capital and financial resources at a time when the rolls in schools are falling. That criterion is being argued by the Department. The plan is also in line with current educational thinking as expressed by the Macfarlane report. I realise that the Department will be considering in detail all schemes. While I do not urge the Minister to give less than full consideration or to reach a hasty decision to the disadvantage of Bolton, I put it to him, as a teacher of long-standing experience and a headmaster, that he must be well aware of the problems that face the authority in the schools if a decision is much further delayed, given the fact that the schools go on holiday on 25 June and Easter intervenes.
That point concerns us deeply, because difficulties will arise, whatever the decision, if there is much more delay in the making thereof. For example, the appointment of staff and recruitment from outside have been held back pending the Minister's decision. We have an excellent teaching force in Bolton, but on the morale of that teaching force must depend the quality of education, no matter what system is in force. It would be terrible if that excellent morale were jeopardised by a further delay in the decision.
I should be less than honest with the Minister if I did not say that I have cause for concern. For example, on 29 January the authority wrote to the Department asking for a meeting between Baroness Young, as the relevant Minister, and officials and councillors from Bolton. No reply had been received from the Department saying when that meeting might take place, and on 23 February I tabled a priority written question. Only on 25 February did the Department arrange a delegation at short notice for the 404 following Monday. I was even more concerned—for the Minister had the courtesy to write to me to say that he could not reply at once—when, by the next Thursday, I had still not received the answer to the question. It was only after a number of telephone calls to the Department and an indication that I would table another question that I received the answer by hand.
Given the timetable that I have outlined and the fact that on 24 February I tabled a question to the Minister for answer on 10 March asking when he intended to make his decision, I do not think that the reply I received saying that he would reply as soon as possible was good enough. I must ask the hon. Gentleman whether the Department is going slow on this issue. Will he give an undertaking, in the light of the factors that I have underlined, that the proposals will receive priority from the Department?
I should like to emphasise one or two relevant points. The proposed scheme will provide parental choice covering the whole of Bolton. The proposed rationalisation is backed by educational opinion on the ground that it is the most effective way to deal with falling rolls. It is also cost effective. The proposals are considerably less demanding of capital investment than the schemes submitted in 1977 and 1979, with essential capital works requirements of about £700,000. By taking surplus buildings out of use and reducing transport costs by changes in the admission arrangements, future revenue savings, based on present costs, of up to £500,000 per annum have been identified.
Over the period of full implementation, the proposed plan to take out of use 14 per cent. of the current place provision by the closure of four existing schools will mean that when the rolls fall buildings that cannot be fully utilised can be removed. The children's position will be looked after in the interim by gearing those schools to others by amalgamation, and the schools to which they are geared will have viability.
On post-16 provision, the authority's scheme pre-dates the Macfarlane report, but, in reviewing 16–19 provision, the arrangements that the scheme submitted by the council presupposes are entirely consistent with the findings and conclusion of the report.
If there is much more delay in the Department's communicating its decision, we shall be faced with a situation in which children transferring from primary to secondary school will have additional anxiety and will feel that their futures are jeopardised. Not only that, but the proper planning and organisation of secondary schools for 1981–82 will be in jeopardy. Furthermore, unless we get a decision within weeks rather than months, contingency action to safeguard the interests of 11-year-olds will, of necessity, have to be based on belated and unscheduled selection procedures. That could create a repetition of the situation that existed last year, when anxiety built up to the extent that references of many cases were made to the Ombudsman. While the Ombudsman upheld the authority, great concern remains in Bolton.
I am pleading that if the Minister will not give us a decision tonight—being an optimist, I hope that he will, but I fear tht he will not—he will convey to the Department the urgency expressed by teachers and pupils and by parents, of all political parties. The concern in Bolton is that education is becoming a political football and it is time that the matter was resolved. It is felt across the board that the submitted plan is the one to resolve the matter. In the 405 interests of Bolton's parents, children and teachers, we ask the Minister to make up his mind quickly and reach the right decision.
§ Mrs. Ann Taylor (Bolton, West)I support the plea of my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, East (Mr. Young) that there should be an early decision on education in Bolton. The Minister, my hon. Friends and I have discussed this matter on many occasions. I hope that this evening will be the last occasion on which there is speculation about what is to happen in terms of comprehensive education in Bolton. The subject has been discussed and examined over many years. The Department should now be in a position to come to an early decision in favour of Bolton's schools going comprehensive in September this year.
I should like to emphasise two of the points made by my hon. Friend. The first is the necessity of an early decision. My hon. friend has asked for a decision in weeks rather than months. I hope for a decision in days rather than weeks. If there is no decision within the next week or two, teachers, parents and children will not know whether there is to be the farce of another 11-plus with children leaving primary school, as in 1979, not knowing to which secondary school they are allocated. We must have a decision as soon as possible whether or not the decision is in favour of going comprehensive.
I also stress to the Minister the need to end argument in Bolton and the need to allow us to implement the scheme from this year. The scheme has been worked out by teachers, parents, governors and members of the education committee, of both political parties. It is the scheme that over the years has had the greatest measure of agreement of all the people in the town.
The message that I should like to give the Minister is that people in Bolton are fed up with all the prevarication and discussion about what should happen in secondary education. They feel that they have a scheme that is sound educationally and fits the Minister's ideas about what should be done locally on falling rolls and in terms of improving provision for 16 to 19-year-olds. It is not an expensive scheme. It is a practical scheme. It would probe the educational opportunity of all the children in the town.
I hope that the Minister tonight will say that he recognises the need for an early decision and that he recognises the merit of the scheme. If he is not to give a decision tonight, I hope that he will say when he will give a decision. It is necessary to end the uncertainty in Bolton and to allow children's needs to be put above everything else. If children's needs are to be put first, we must have a decision in favour of Bolton going comprehensive this year. I hope that the Minister will recognise the validity of these points.
§ Mr. John Roper (Farnworth)I support the representations that have been put forward by hon. Members representing the metropolitan district of Bolton. I should like to draw attention to Little Lever, whose problem is one not of falling rolls but of a rapidly increasing school population. There is the problem of the need for urgent decisions so that building can be undertaken. I hope that the Minister, for this reason as well as those already mentioned, will give an early decision, even if he does not give it this evening.
§ Mr. Roger Stott (Westhoughton)My hon. Friends the Members for Bolton, East (Mr. Young) and Bolton, West (Mrs. Taylor) have deployed the case admirably. I wish only to add a comment about how the situation in the metropolitan borough of Bolton affects the constituents of Westhoughton. My constituency falls within the metropolitan borough of Bolton, but it is in a somewhat different position. Westhoughton has a comprehensive system. It is a legacy from the days of the Lancashire county council. As the Minister will understand from early days in Baxenden, we have a fairly progressive system in Westhoughton. We have a fully integrated comprehensive system.
The problem arises because at least half my constituency falls within the metropolitan borough of Bolton. It is administered by the Bolton council, and the Bolton council has submitted to the Minister's Department a scheme to go comprehensive.
The problem in my constituency is that two schools, Blackrod-Rivington high school and Westhoughton high school, which are and which are to remain comprehensive, are at this moment oversubscribed, because there is no decision on what is to happen in the borough of Bolton.
I hope that the Minister will respond to my hon. Friends and that at some stage he and his right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State will make a decision about what Bolton wants to do. But in the meantime there are those of us, such as my hon. Friend the Member for Farnworth (Mr. Roper) and I, whose schools are to some extent comprehensive, who have a problem in that certain people in Bolton wish to send their children to the schools in our constituencies. I should not object to that, since the schools are very good, but it does not make for good education.
The problem will remain as long as this question remains unresolved. I therefore add my voice to those raised tonight in saying to the Minister and his right hon. and learned Friend "For goodness sake, at some time, somehow, make a decision to get this awful situation sorted out". My hon. Friends and I want the matter settled for the sake of the children and their parents whose interests we seek to represent in the House. At present, because of the indecision, the problems are fairly critical. We need a decision from the Minister on the question of comprehensive education in Bolton, and we need it fairly soon.
§ The Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science (Dr. Rhodes Boyson)I know the Balton area—indeed, I have written about it——
§ Mr. Donald Thompson (Sowerby)We all know it.
§ Dr. BoysonApparently, even people from Yorkshire know it, which shows much in favour or the area about which hon. Members have spoken tonight. In fact, I was once offered an appointment in Bolton, but at that time, for some reason, Lancashire was keen to keep me and sent me to a headship elsewhere in the Rossendale valley. I also wrote about the poor law and the cotton industry there. I cannot give hon. Members copies of what I wrote, because it is all out of print now.
I am aware also of the point about the date of going down in the summer, which is almost unique in England, 407 though I know that there are different dates in Scotland. Ramsbottom, where I first taught, had the same dates. They began really on the first of the old Lancashire wakes week.
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bolton, East (Mr. Young) and his hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, West (Mrs. Taylor) and to other hon. Members who have spoken for giving me an opportunity to say a few words about these proposals by the Bolton education authority. However, I must say at the outset that I can say nothing about the merits or demerits of the scheme of reorganisation itself, or about the individual schools involved, since that could be seen to prejudice my right hon. and learned Friend's decision. Neither can I comment on the points about the scheme which the hon. Member for Bolton, East and other hon. Members have put, but I can assure the House that all that has been said will be conveyed to my right hon. and learned Friend, and also to my noble Friend the Minister of State, who has particular responsibility on the schools side. I include in that assurance the information presented in the debate and also the question of the urgency of the need to get the matter sorted out. I include also the issue of comprehensive education, about which hon. Members on the Opposition Benches feel strongly, and the question of falling rolls, which is bound up in the reorganisation.
I must first express concern about any suggestion that the decision on the proposals is being delayed deliberately by my Department. Hon. Members will be aware of the procedures to be followed for the publication of proposals by local education authorities under section 12 of the Education Act 1980. Bolton published its scheme on 3 October last year, and there followed the statutory two-month period during which objections to the proposals were submitted to the education authority. The authority then had until 3 January this year to submit the objections received to my right hon. and learned Friend, together with its observations upon them. This it did immediately before the Christmas period.
I have set out the timetable to demonstrate that there was very little that could be done by my Department until the proposals came to us early that year. Since this time, our consideration of the scheme has proceeded in the light of information supplied by the authority and Her Majesty's inspectorate and the comments made by both objectors to and supporters of the scheme. I may say in passing—and the hon. Members will know this—that more than 1,500 signatories have expressed their opposition to the proposals and more than 1,000 have given their support. Justice must be seen to be done to their views, on whichever side those signatures come.
I have already supplied the hon. Member with information—for which he rightly pressed me—on the length of time that it has taken to reach a decision on schemes for comprehensive education submitted to my right hon. and learned Friend since he took office. The hon. Gentleman will know, therefore, that on average—I have all the figures with me this evening—there has been a period of about seven and a half months between publication of such proposals and the announcement of a decision. It is now about five and a half months since Bolton published its proposals, and it would be virtually unprecedented for such major and complex proposals to be decided more quickly.
408 We are, however, aware—and it has been stressed this evening by hon. Members—of the need for an early decision, and we are equally concerned to bring an end to the feeling of uncertainty that is inevitably being experienced by staff, pupils and parents in the area. This point and the case for implementation of the proposals in September this year were put to my noble Friend the Minister of State when she met representatives of the Bolton education committee on Monday 2 March. We intend to give the proposals full and careful consideration, and a decision will be taken as quickly as is consistent with that.
I have listened very carefully to what the hon. Gentleman has said—just as I have to what has been said by his hon. Friends—in support of the proposals, and I assure him that his views and those of his hon. Friends will be taken fully into account. I appreciate that there has been a state of acute uncertainty during the past three years over the future of secondary education in Bolton. I do not think that it is any exaggeration to say that. I recognise that such uncertainty can tend to demoralise all partners in the education service in the area, which would also have a harmful effect on the schools themselves. That has been stressed this evening. I also recognise that some change will be necessary in the area to reduce the harmful effects of falling rolls and to eliminate uneconomical surplus school places, and that the scheme for reorganisation along comprehensive lines has been made in that context. On our figures—some people may put it even higher—there has been an 18 per cent. drop in the number of pupils coming through. Some have put the figure as high as 20 per cent., but ours is still a significant figure.
Though, as I have said, I cannot comment on these current proposals, I shall take the opportunity to repeat the Government's attitude towards all proposals to reorganise schools along comprehensive lines. As we have always maintained, we firmly believe that it is for local education authorities, in consultation with local people, to decide what pattern of school provision they believe is best suited to the needs of their areas. Furthermore, the Government have always said that we are not opposed in principle to comprehensive schools, and our record since taking office two years ago shows that.
Decisions on 14 proposals for the reorganisation of individual schools or whole districts have been taken since we took office, and of these 11 have been approved—a clear indication, I suggest, that we are not being dogmatic in our approach to the requests of local authorities to go comprehensive. We all know that there were and are good grammar schools, just as there are good and bad comprehensive schools. Unlike Labour Members—I just say this gently—our concern is not with labels that may be attached to schools but with the quality of the schools themselves.
The discussion this evening has been very sensible, and one could say non-party, and I do not want to bring in a party feeling. What may be appropriate in one area and in one set of circumstances may not be appropriate in another. While it is for local education authorities to decide what proposals to make to my right hon. and learned Friend, it is up to him, and it is his responsibility, to weigh all the arguments that are put to him and to judge whether, in his opinion, the proposals are in the best educational interests of the children concerned.
We also accept that one of the most difficult problems facing all local education authorities is how to make the 409 best educational provision in the light of falling rolls. Bolton has recognised that it will have to do that and it has decided to try to reduce its provision. It proposes to achieve this by structuring its secondary provision on a comprehensive basis. As I said before, this proposal was for Bolton to make.
§ Mr. David YoungWhen we were discussing the length of time that authorities had to wait to have their proposals approved, the Minister said that 5½ months was unprecedented. Is he saying that he expects that the time is nearer 7½ months than 5½ months?
§ Dr. BoysonThat is a fair point. I was trying to put the matter into perspective. I did not intend to give the impression that 7½ months would be involved. The average is 7½ months. The situation in Bolton, historically, is difficult. Large schemes might affect Farnworth and Turton. We are not trying to increase the average.
410 In considering all proposals made by local education authorities under section 12 of the 1980 Act, my right hon. and learned Friend takes account of all the relevant factors, including the educational interests of the children involved, any implications for public expenditure and the weight and nature of any objections. I can assure hon. Members that this will be so in the case of the Bolton proposals. Such a detailed analysis inevitably takes time, but decisions on proposals involving such a large number of children must be seen to be based on the fullest information available and carefully made. My right hon. and learned Friend will reach his decision as soon as possible, and we will write to hon. Members to let them know the outcome. I shall convey to my noble Friend the Minister of State and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State the views expressed tonight, particularly those on the need for urgency.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at eight minutes to One o'clock.