§ 1 pm
§ Mr. Jonathan Aitken (South Thanet)I am most grateful to have been given the opportunity to raise in an Adjournment debate the subject of schools in Broadstairs.
I shall devote most of my speech to the individual and separate problems of three schools in Broadstairs that have become most inappropriately entangled in a complex dispute and need some help—perhaps even a touch of the wisdom of Solomon—from my hon. Friend the Minister if the dispute is to be sorted out swiftly and satisfactorily to the benefit of several hundred local schoolchildren, their anxious families and their worried teachers. Before I focus on the dispute and make some suggestions for solving it, I shall make some general comments on the wider subject of school education in Broadstairs because it is, on the whole, a sparkling success story in which our local community rightly takes great pride.
Broadstairs is a charming town on the Kent coast with a residential population of approximately 25,000 and a flourishing education sector consisting of 12 schools. They include at secondary level Holy Cross school and St. George's grant-maintained school, whose GCSE examination results last year were top of the league tables for non-selective schools in Kent and second top in the league table for modern schools in the entire country. Charles Dickens grant-maintained school has a new science block under construction and scored a commendable 89 per cent. pass rate among its GCSE candidates taking five or more subjects. Dane Court grant-maintained school had its best ever year for examination results last year, with a 95 per cent. pass rate among GCSE candidates taking five or more subjects.
At junior level, Broadstairs has three good schools: Upton, Bromstone and St. Peter's, to which I shall refer in a moment. There are also two infant schools: St. Mildred's and Callis Grange, which also features in the dispute that is central to the debate.
I should also mention that the independent sector flourishes in Broadstairs with Haddon Dene school, St. Joseph's convent school and Wellesley House school—the latter being one of the outstanding preparatory schools in the country. Perhaps I should declare an interest as I say those words of praise about Wellesley House, as our own three children have had remarkably happy and successful educations there.
What all those schools in Broadstairs have in common are high standards, dedicated teachers and a keen sense of mutual interest and interaction with the local community. When something goes right, such as the good examination results that I have just mentioned, the whole community sits up and takes notice.
The same is also true, however, if something goes wrong. That is why I now refer to a subject that is in danger of going wrong on the Broadstairs education scene—the dispute affecting three schools—and that is the main focus of the debate.
At the heart of the dispute is a question mark hanging over the future of one of the oldest and most respected schools in Broadstairs. That is St. Peter's school, or to give it its formal title, St. Peter's in Thanet Church of England aided junior school. Unfortunately, St. Peter's 1498 also has the less happy distinction of having some of the worst premises in the entire county in the shape of its 19th-century physical facilities.
St. Peter's has the fundamental disadvantage of being a split-site school, with its two main buildings separated by a high street. The busy traffic creates daily physical risks for the pupils. The buildings deserve the overworked adjective "Dickensian", for they are overcrowded, unhealthy, damp and dangerous.
To give the House a vivid picture of St. Peter's in the winter rain, I can do no better than quote a report written last autumn by the school's then chairman of governors, Mr. Norman Morland:
As chairman of governors I visited the school on Wednesday 13 October, following several days of heavy autumnal rain. For the sake of the morale of all concerned, I went over to the high street building and can only say that I was appalled by what I saw. The atmosphere was akin to that of a hot house in Kew. Buckets and bowls were everywhere to catch the rain. Water was trickling down one of the walls, the pages of the books were curling up in the moisture-laden air, there was fungus on the cupboard walls. The catalogue could continue on and on.In the midst of all this the staff and the pupils worked heroically and deserve the highest commendation for continuing in conditions that are totally unacceptable and are deleterious to health of pupil and teacher.So much for the bad news, which was well recorded in Mr. Morland's vivid prose and confirmed by a recent report by the Office of Standards in Education inspectorate. However, that bad news is on the verge of being consigned to the archives of history because the good news is that the local education authority, Kent county council and the Canterbury diocesan board of education, after many long and disappointing delays, have put forward an excellent proposal for a new St. Peter's school building.That building project, which received no objections during the consultation period and was overwhelmingly well supported by the local community, is for a new, enlarged third-form entry junior school for 360 pupils. The new St. Peter's school would consist of 12 classrooms to be built around a central courtyard on land already owned by the local education authority adjacent to Callis Grange infant school. The funding for the project—some £1.6 million—is now in place, so until the recent unexpected dispute erupted, the new St. Peter's school was ready to roll, confidently on schedule to open its doors in September 1997.
I should emphasise that the new St. Peter's school building is being developed alongside another important school building development on the same site—that of Callis Grange county infant school. Callis Grange school, which currently has 356 pupils on its roll, suffers from an overcrowding problem, which has been temporarily alleviated by the use of five mobile classrooms and a mobile toilet block.
The facilities are woefully inadequate, particularly in the freezing, wind-chill weather conditions that prevailed last week. The LEA recognised the problem, which is exacerbated by the growing demand for school places in Broadstairs, and gave its full backing to a building project that would enlarge the school by 90 extra places. That means building new classroom accommodation to cope with the expected increase in the school roll and to replace some of the mobiles. The enlargement of Callis Grange school is scheduled to take place in time for the new 1499 classrooms to be opened in September 1997. As the project is being built on the same site and time scale as the new St. Peter's school, the two developments need to proceed simultaneously.
Against that background, I hope that it is clear to my hon. Friend that the substantial combined building project of a new school for St. Peter's and enlarged classrooms for Callis Grange is important and urgent in terms of the physical facilities and the basic need for more school places in Broadstairs.
Broadstairs is sometimes thought of as a town for retired people, but the community is becoming demographically more well balanced and has an increasing number of young families moving into the area. There was consternation among those young families, whose children require adequate provision for primary and infant school places, when the news broke recently that the St. Peter's and Callis Grange building projects had been halted in their tracks because of a totally unexpected and unpredictable obstacle in the form of eight letters of statutory objection signed by 10 Broadstairs residents. They were all dated 9 November. The letters were received by my hon. Friend's Department just two days before the period for objections to the public notices expired on 12 November. Those objections have the explosive potential to block or seriously delay the St. Peter's and Callis Grange school building developments unless they are withdrawn or my hon. Friend uses her statutory ministerial powers swiftly to overrule them.
I said a few moments ago that the unexpected arrival of those last-minute objections caused consternation in Broadstairs, but in some ways the word "consternation" is an understatement. For I am sorry to have to report that there was also a degree of anger and astonishment when it became apparent that the letters of objection were identical in text and had apparently been organised by the Roman Catholic archdiocese of Southwark's commission for schools in Kent, in order to draw attention to the plight of St. Joseph's convent school in Broadstairs, which faced the possibility of closure.
Needless to say, there are two sides to this story and I shall endeavour to explain sympathetically and constructively the anxieties of the archdiocese of Southwark about St. Joseph's in a moment. Nevertheless the manner and format in which those essentially bogus, although paradoxically sincere, objections were lodged raised the bizarre spectacle of a sectarian divide in Broadstairs, in which Roman Catholics were suspected of blocking the urgently needed building of a Church of England school.
I hasten to assure the House that those fears are not justified. Broadstairs has not suddenly become Belfast. The religious communities in the town remain on good terms, not least because local Catholic leaders such as Father Ronald Duggan, the parish priest of Broadstairs, and Canon Bill Clements, the dean of Thanet, have made it clear that the local Roman Catholic community has no objections to the St. Peter's school building project.
Meanwhile the Church of England vicar of St. Peter's, Canon Nick Bury, who is also chairman of the governors of St. Peter's school, has made it clear that there is nothing but Anglican good will towards St. Joseph's 1500 convent school, whose future aspirations should not affect the St. Peter's building project at all and should be seen as a quite separate issue, important though it is to the Catholic community of Broadstairs.
Let me therefore now refer to the separate issue of the future of St. Joseph's convent school. That excellent independent private school, which has approximately 100 Catholic pupils of primary school age, has for many years been run and subsidised by the sisters of the Christian retreat in Broadstairs. Sadly, the sisters, whose numbers and resources are declining, have decided that they can no longer continue to subsidise the operation of the school after 1997.
The archdiocese of Southwark, after taking local soundings in Broadstairs, came to the conclusion that, rather than see a much loved Catholic school close, it would make greater sense to try to continue the excellent traditions of St. Joseph's by seeing whether it could be taken into the maintained sector as a primary school. Confidential discussions between the LEA and the archdiocese for that purpose therefore started earlier this year.
I think it fair to say that there must have been some misunderstandings in those discussions, since for some reason or other the archdiocese came to believe that the only way to protect the future interest of St. Joseph's was to lodge objections to the St. Peter's and Callis Grange building project at the last minute in order to draw the attention of the Secretary of State and my hon. Friend the Minister to the full background of primary school options in Broadstairs. I hope that I have now explained enough about the background to primary school education in Broadstairs to demonstrate that there is a basic need for, and room for, a new and enlarged St. Peter's Church of England primary school and a St. Joseph's Roman Catholic primary school, transferred from the independent sector to the maintained sector as a voluntary-aided Roman Catholic school.
Since I started balloting for this Adjournment debate, further talks have been held between the LEA and the archdiocese of Southwark. A few days ago the Kent education committee, with much input and encouragement from Councillor Fred Shutler, the energetic county councillor for Broadstairs, decided to support the proposal to establish a new voluntary-aided Roman Catholic primary school in Broadstairs in September 1997, on the basis that the LEA will be submitting a bid for 90 additional primary school places for Thanet in 1997. Those additional places, taken together with the existing roll of St. Joseph's, will provide ample justification for the proposed new one-form entry primary school.
Against that background, and even though there is no real linkage between the St. Joseph's and the St. Peter's projects, it does seem that this should be a story that will have a happy outcome early in 1996, bringing to an end the current tense dispute affecting the three schools that I have been talking about.
So in order that those three schools can live happily ever after, I now ask my hon. Friend to respond, I hope affirmatively, to the key questions that need to be answered. So far as St. Joseph's is concerned, can my hon. Friend confirm that her Department has received, or expects to receive, a bid from Kent local education authority for additional primary school places for Thanet in 1997? Will she look favourably on the proposal, which 1501 I know her officials are aware of, for a new St. Joseph's voluntary-aided Roman Catholic primary school, to open in September 1997?
So far as St. Peter's school and Callis Grange school are concerned, can my hon. Friend the Minister announce that she is now minded—or soon will be minded—to approve the LEA's and the Canterbury diocesan board's proposals for the combined building projects to go ahead as planned and in good time for the new St. Peter's school and the new Callis Grange classrooms to open their doors in September 1997?
If my hon. Friend is minded, in this season of peace and good will, to indicate her approval for all those projects this afternoon, I can assure her that she will be giving the education world in Broadstairs the best possible Christmas present.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mrs. Cheryl Gillan)I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for South Thanet (Mr. Aitken) on securing this important Adjournment debate on the schools in his constituency. He is well known as a champion of the excellent education in South Thanet, and his diligence in requesting this debate is a testament to his attitude to his constituency and its schools.
I want to begin by discussing some general issues that my right hon. Friend raised, not least the sparkling success of the schools in his constituency. I am delighted to hear about the high standards being achieved in Broadstairs schools, which clearly owe much to the excellent quality of the teaching. Once again, we must applaud the enthusiasm and dedication of the teaching profession, which has so rightly been described as a vocation.
School improvement is always at the top of the Government's agenda. It is also encouraging to note that this year's GCSE results for Broadstairs continue to be good. I am aware that three of the four secondary schools are grant-maintained, and their success is a testament to the GM policy.
We firmly believe that self-government is the best way of running schools. It sets schools free to decide for themselves how they use their resources and to target them where they will have most effect. It means that they can keep and develop their distinctive characters to meet the needs of the communities that they serve. Self-government releases the energies of teachers and governors by giving them responsibility for their schools' futures, and they certainly rise to that challenge. GM schools are well managed, achieve excellent results as they have done in Broadstairs, and are clearly popular with parents. They can get things done quickly, without waiting for town hall bureaucracy to get things moving, and they are directly accountable to local parents.
In Kent, more than half the secondary pupils are now being educated in GM schools. Parents have voted yes in ballots on going GM, so it is pretty clear that Kent parents support self-government of schools. It is a pity that we do not often see a positive approach on the part of Kent county council. It has been quite hostile to grant-maintained status, and it makes life as difficult as possible once schools have decided to ballot.
The development of GM schools is only one aspect of the Government's mission to promote excellence in education. We are also funding initiatives to encourage the 1502 development of specialist schools, which bring together three important strands of our education and employment policies: raising standards, extending choice and diversity, and linking schools and the business community. My right hon. Friend will be aware of the popularity of our specialist schools programme; indeed Sandwich high school, in South Thanet, has recently been designated a technology college. That programme proves that education and business want to work together. Each technology or language college is backed by sponsorship of about £100,000; private sector sponsorship for school education totals more than £14 million as a result of the programme.
The specialist schools programme is outstandingly popular. It was launched only in September 1993, but there are now more than 140 schools in it. There are 127 technology colleges as well as the first 16 language colleges. As there is stiff competition for places in the programme, all the schools approved can be proud of their success.
I have more good news about Kent to add to that presented by my right hon. Friend. We have been able to confirm our support for capital spending on schools. The figures for Kent are not available, but we have national figures, as I announced yesterday. Despite the tight public spending round, we have been able to secure capital spending for 1996–97 in local education authority maintained schools at a level that is 7 per cent. higher than the current year. That demonstrates the Government's commitment to helping LEAs improve the quality of their school buildings.
It is for LEAs, however, to decide their own capital expenditure priorities and to make the best use of the resources that are available to them. The annual capital guidelines, the ACGs, that have been announced are not tied to particular projects. Nor do they represent the total of resources available to LEAs for capital spending. The authorities are able also to invest their capital receipts. They can use funds from their revenue budgets for capital purposes if they wish. The Government do not control the funding of individual projects at county or voluntary-controlled schools.
The Kent local education authority was given an ACG of £23,223,000 in 1996–97. That was by far the largest in the country. That sum represents 40 per cent. of its total bid. It is significantly above the national average of 23 per cent. The ACG largely reflects the extent to which the authority's plans for spending on schools matched the national priority criteria.
Allocations for voluntary-aided schools' capital works have increased by 7 per cent. to £62 million in 1996–97. There has been set aside £38 million for repair grants in line with 1995–96.
Allocations for basic need and exceptional basic need will be much higher in 1996–97 than in recent years. They will be about £6.6 million compared with £2.5 million in 1995–96. The allocations for grant-maintained schools continue to show a healthy increase as well, from £130 million in the current year to £138 million in 1996–97. Those figures demonstrate the Government's commitment to improving standards in education. The examples given by my right hon. Friend provide encouraging evidence of the success of our policies in practice.
My right hon. Friend drew the attention of the House to Callis Grange and St. Peter's schools in Thanet. Both schools are in Broadstairs. I am sure that my right hon. 1503 Friend will appreciate that as an enlarged county infant school and a new Church of England junior in Broadstairs will be considered in the context of statutory proposals, those matters are currently under consideration by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. Therefore, I cannot comment in detail on the issues that he raised. I am well aware, however, of the problems surrounding the provision of primary school places in Broadstairs.
My officials visited St. Peter's junior school earlier this year. They were able to advise the governors and Kent LEA on how to proceed. My right hon. Friend will understand that I cannot prejudge the decision of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. I can assure my right hon. Friend, however, that I have listened carefully to what he said about the condition of the buildings used by pupils at Callis Grange and St. Peter's. I can give him my assurance that his description and the details that he has given will be taken into account.
§ Mr. AitkenI am grateful to my hon. Friend for the constructive and helpful tone in which she is replying. I understand that, for statutory reasons, she cannot prejudge the ruling of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. But what is the timetable within which my right hon. Friend will make a decision'? If it is a favourable one, will it be made in good time to allow the building works to start within a period that will enable them to be completed so that the schools may open their doors in September 1997?
§ Mrs. GillanI understand my right hon. Friend's determination to try to extract from me a timetable, but I am unable to give him one today. I undertake to write to him in the new year. I shall try to give him an idea of the timetable for my right hon. Friend's decisions.
As for St. Joseph's school, I should explain that we have not yet received any statutory proposals to establish a new voluntary-aided Roman Catholic primary school in Broadstairs. That remains an outstanding matter. If and when we do receive such proposals, we shall consider them fully and carefully, and as speedily as possible.
On a more positive note, I can confirm that we have accepted in principle the basic need case for additional primary school places in Broadstairs. For reasons that I think I have explained fully, I cannot comment on whether those places will be provided at St. Peter's and St. Joseph's, bearing in mind the need for the statutory process. I cannot go beyond saying that, if the proposals are approved, funding will, of course, follow.
I am sorry that I am unable to deliver all the Christmas presents on my right hon. Friend's list. I trust that he will accept my reply as just a little stocking filler.