HC Deb 26 June 1996 vol 280 cc332-3
12. Sir Michael Marshall

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if she will list the 10 worst-performing local education authorities on the basis of national examination results. [33209]

Mr. Paice

The 10 local education authority areas with the lowest percentage of 15-year-old pupils achieving five or more A to C grades at GCSE were Islington, Knowsley, Tower Hamlets, Southwark, Manchester, Lambeth, Newham, Hackney, Liverpool and Sandwell.

Sir Michael Marshall

In that sad picture—sad for the parents and sad for the children involved—what common feature does my hon. Friend detect? Would I be right to assume that none of those authorities is Conservative controlled?

Mr. Paice

My hon. Friend is right. Of course none of those authorities is Conservative controlled—none of them has been for some considerable time. That is the common theme that he rightly identified. It is Labour, in reality, in control of education. Those authorities have been controlled by the Labour party—with a little help from the Liberal Democrats in a couple of cases—for many years. That is why they are consistently at or near the bottom of the table on education standards. That is the reality, not the pious words of the Labour party. If people want to see what Labour is really like in control of education, they need only look at those authorities.

Mr. Eastham

Is it not extremely dishonest of the Minister to draw comparisons with inner-city authorities, which have a high incidence of immigrant children whose first language is not English, when the Government are cutting section 11 funding to assist such pupils?

Mr. Paice

Most inner-city authorities are spending vastly more than the national average. Indeed, Lambeth is at the top of the spending tree for primary schools and second from the top for secondary schools. The tables that we publish demonstrate that there is no correlation between pupils' achievements and the money being spent on them by wasteful authorities.

Mr. Day

Am I right to believe that the Labour authorities that rank in the bottom 10 are wedded to the principles of so-called progressive education, which have led to the destruction of such vital assets in schools as competitive sport, and believe that schools cannot produce pupils who could be classified as winners? In many schools, entire classes of losers have therefore been produced, which is not in the pupils' best interests and destroys opportunities for pupils of all abilities.

Mr. Paice

My hon. Friend is entirely right. The authorities that, sadly, have been controlled by Opposition parties for many years have consistently promoted forms of education that have now been proven to fail pupils. They adopt allegedly "progressive" methods—if ever there was an abuse of a term, that is it. Such methods have destroyed young people's opportunities. Nobody could take any pleasure or pride from the fact that only 17.4 per cent. of pupils in Islington and 19 per cent. in Knowsley are gaining five or more GCSEs, but, somehow, the Opposition try to do so.

Ms Estelle Morris

Does the Minister share my concern that figures given to me in a written answer this morning show quite clearly that, last year, Tory-controlled Westminster increased its spending on bureaucracy so that it spends more than any other local authority in the country? Will he join me in congratulating Labour local authorities such as Sheffield and Birmingham, which last year further reduced the amount spent on bureaucracy and now spend less than half that spent by Tory-controlled Westminster?

Mr. Paice

I am always glad to be asked a question by a former grammar school pupil, especially in the light of the allegations made yesterday about my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's policies. Westminster achieves the best results of any inner-London borough, of which the Government and the Conservative party are very proud.

Mr. Harry Greenway

Will my hon. Friend confirm that some lucky pupils in those very badly run authorities have assisted places at independent schools? Is it not a disgrace that the Labour party runs those authorities and many others so badly that it denies poor children proper opportunities, as it will by trying to abolish the assisted places scheme? That is typical of the Labour party.

Mr. Paice

Given his knowledge of these matters, nothing should surprise my hon. Friend. It should not surprise him that Labour Members are intent on removing the ladder up which most of them climbed—the ladder of grammar or direct grant schools, which many attended. Indeed, earlier we listened to constant sedentary comments from a very prominent former grammar school pupil, the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner). [Interruption.] I do not like to be provocative. My hon. Friend should also take into account the fact that those authorities' failures extend not only to examination results; six of them are also among the 10 worst authorities for truancy.