HC Deb 08 November 1988 vol 140 cc163-5
10. Mr. Thurnham

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what recent representations he has received about schools wishing to opt out of local authority control; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Kenneth Baker

My Department has received inquiries from a large number of parents, governors and others about the opt-out provisions of the Education Reform Act. The Electoral Reform Society has now arranged, or is arranging, ballots of parents at a number of schools considering grant-maintained status.

Mr. Thurnham

Will my right hon. Friend give an early and favourable reply to the governors of St. James' church school in Bolton, who are fighting to save their school from threatened closure? Is it not ironic that Bolton's Labour council should choose such a popular school to close when 99 per cent. of the parents in an 83 per cent. turnout voted so convincingly to seize the Government's lifeline?

Mr. Baker

I am sure that my hon. Friend will appreciate that I cannot comment on a particular school, because when the proposals come to me I have a quasi-judicial position and I have to examine the proposals carefully. I assure him that if the governing body puts forward these proposals, it has to go through a statutory procedure. I shall deal with the matter—when the statutory period of two months has elapsed—as quickly as possible. I am delighted that so many schools are seriously considering grant-maintained status. This is all part of our great reforming programme. Competition will make for better quality. I understand from the Electoral Reform Society that 15 ballots are expected before Christmas.

Mr. Lewis

When the Secretary of State receives the application from St. James' church school, will he note that £1.5 million must be spent on that school because of a ground fault on which the school is built, which is why the local authority took the decision to close that school? Will he also take note of the fact that 700 plus places are surplus to requirements and have been the subject of a report by the Audit Commission? Will he condemn the opportunism of the hon. Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham)?

Mr. Baker

I am not prepared to condemn the opportunism of one of my colleagues, who is making a constituency point. It is because of these factors that the holder of my office cannot, and should not, make any comments about a particular school, because the matter has to come to him and he will have to look at it in his quasi-judicial role.

Mr. Madel

Will my right hon. Friend always look sympathetically at schools that get good examination results, have strong parental support and are threatened by closure only because of party political manoeuvring by county councillors and inexplicable hostility by local education authority officials?

Mr. Baker

Those are factors that I have to bear in mind when I am considering these matters. We have already made it clear, in the various guidelines that we have given, that one should not be too hasty in closing down schools of proven worth, as has happened in the past.

Mr. Straw

The Secretary of State must be aware that he is placing local education authorities in an impossible position. On the one hand, he has been putting them under pressure to close surplus places. On the other hand, any school now faced with closure can decide, understandably, to seek to opt out. What undertakings will the Secretary of State give to enable local education authorities, whether Conservative or Labour, to implement his policy of orderly school closures? What undertakings will he give to ensure that in capital spending, as in current, there will be no favourable treatment, no bribery of schools to entice them to opt out?

Mr. Baker

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman now shifts his grounds of criticism of grant-maintained status. As the Education Reform Act was going through its stages in the House, his argument was that few schools would opt for this status, although we said that many schools would be attracted by it. It was also said that very few parents would vote. The hon. Gentleman should look at the first two ballots. He has repeatedly raised the question of capital, and I want to make it clear that we are not offering financial advantages to grant-maintained schools. We shall have to consider the capital needs of such schools as they apply, and grant-maintained schools will receive current funding on the same basis as other schools in the authority.

Mr. Harry Greenway

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, to opt out, a school will need to demonstrate strong parental support and good leadership from governors and from the head of staff—all factors that can only benefit pupils? Therefore, is it not a fact that the more schools that opt out, the better it will be for our children?

Mr. Baker

My hon. Friend is right. This option is now available and requires the considerable commitment of parents and governors, but that is in the full strain of our education policy. We are passing more responsibility down the line to individual schools and governors. We are also increasing competition in the education system. That is good for quality.