Grant-maintained Schools (Hansard, 27 March 1990)

§ 4. Mr. Lofthouse
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will make a statement on the guidelines for approval of grant-maintained status for schools.

§ Mr. MacGregor
In considering proposals for grant-maintained status, steps are taken to ensure that I have all the necessary information to enable me to decide the proposals on their merits.

§ Mr. Lofthouse
The Secretary of State will be aware that of the 65 schools that voted to opt out, 60 per cent. had been involved in the reorganisation or closure programme. Does not that show that the reorganisation programme is being used to assist the opt-out policy? Notwithstanding the Secretary of State's answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, South (Ms. Primarolo), how many High Court cases will he lose before he scraps the disastrous opt-out policy?

§ Mr. MacGregor
I totally reject the idea that this is a disastrous policy, as do all parents who will benefit from it. Among the grant-maintained schools on which we have information, applications for next September seem to be up by 40 per cent. on this year. That shows what parents want, and that is what the hon. Gentleman wants to deprive them of. I hope that it will be noted that he does not believe in parental choice. I have already rejected applications from 11 schools that did not satisfy me about their viability. All were in the circumstances that the hon. Gentleman described—subject to closure by their local education authorities at the time of the parental ballots or just afterwards.
In some cases, parents decided not to pursue grant-maintained status. They had obviously looked at the matter in the round.

§ Mrs. Peacock
Will my right hon. Friend ensure that all school governors are aware of the guidelines on grant-maintained schools and the advantages that such schools afford local schools, local children and future education?

§ Mr. MacGregor
In the past week we have prepared a leaflet that is available to all schools and parents explaining what grant-maintained schools are about, the process of applying to become a grant-maintained school and so on. As my hon. Friend will know, a charitable body, Choice in Education, exists to show schools the benefits of grant-maintained status. What will make the case for grant-maintained schools above all will be the enthusiasm and morale of the teaching staff, the tremendous support of the governors and the fact that parents want to send their children to them.

§ Mr. Straw
Does the Secretary of State recall making clear and categorical promises that grant-maintained schools would be treated in the same way as local authority schools when it came to funding? In view of those promises, will he explain why the so-called charity, Choice in Education, which is no more than a Conservative front organisation run by a Conservative councillor, Andrew Turner, has been writing to schools considering opting out as follows: The possibility of better funding is by far the most important factor leading to a decision to opt out … the 197 budgets set for Grant-Maintained schools indicate first year funding levels of between 15 per cent. and 26 per cent. higher than the historic level"? If the policy is so popular, why is it necessary for the Secretary of State and a front organisation to resort to bare-faced bribery?

§ Mr. MacGregor
Current funding is entirely on all fours with the maintained sector. The hon. Gentleman has ignored the fact that grant-maintained schools can have that proportion of funding for the services that are provided centrally, normally by local education authorities. That funding is made available on a strictly comparable basis for grant-maintained schools. That has meant that we have made provision for services which were previously provided centrally—on average about 15 per cent. of the direct costs of the schools. That puts the funding on all fours with the maintained sector. The great benefit to the grant-maintained school is that priorities are decided on the expenditure itself. That is being proved already to be of benefit to children.

§ Mr. Harry Greenway
Is my right hon. Friend aware that teachers are queuing to apply for every job that is available in grant-maintained schools which is a sign of the great success of those schools? Does he agree that those teachers are unlikely to strike on 4 April and damage children's education? Will he do all that he can to dissuade all teachers from striking on 4 April? That act would only damage the education of children and further damage the teaching profession.

§ Mr. MacGregor
My hon. Friend is right. I have visited a number of grant-maintained schools and met many teachers from them. I know that the morale, enthusiasm, dedication and commitment of those teachers is high. I am sure that the great majority of teachers throughout the country share that dedication and commitment. That is why I deplore the attitude of a small minority of teachers, reflected in the NAS-UWT decision to strike for a day. As my hon. Friend says, that is damaging to children and, in the eyes of the public, to the teaching profession as a whole. That is why I am grateful to the other teaching unions for taking a responsible attitude on these matters and saying that such action serves no useful purpose. It merely diminishes the teaching profession.