HC Deb 20 March 1996 vol 274 cc356-7
2. Mr. O'Hara

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what estimate she has made of the cost of school accommodation to cater for the increase in pupil numbers in 1996–97. [20124]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mrs. Cheryl Gillan)

The duty to ensure that there are sufficient school places rests with local education authorities and the Funding Agency for Schools. It is for them to decide their priorities for capital spending.

Mr. O'Hara

That answer really will not do. The nation's parents and governors are well aware that there is a backlog of minimum health and safety requirements in schools for which capital funds are needed, amounting now to billions of pounds, and Government capital spending has been halved in the past 20 years. Is not the Minister well aware that the chief inspector of schools has said that one in seven primary schools and one in five secondary schools are already suffering from cramped and otherwise inadequate accommodation? Are not the regulations that went through the House this week a pure blind to remove the Government's embarrassment at not finding the funding to meet schools' minimum requirements?

Mrs. Gillan

I detect a spending pledge there. In fact, Government capital support for schools for 1996–97 will be almost £700 million—a 6.7 per cent. increase on 1995–96. What the nation is waiting for, and what should cause the Labour party embarrassment, is Labour's education record. Perhaps it will be explaining to the teachers in Sheffield schools how it managed to make a blunder costing £1 million which resulted in the teachers saying that they lacked confidence in every stage of the education process in Sheffield. I shall not take any lectures from the Labour party, which cannot put its own house in order.

Sir Irvine Patnick

There is more. I have recently received a letter from Sheffield city council, with a copy of a—

Mr. John Marshall

Was it a council tax demand?

Sir Irvine Patnick

No, it was not a council tax demand. It was a resolution condemning the hypocrisy of leading Labour politicians—I have it here and anyone can see it—in seeking privileges for their own children which they deny to other people. Does that not show that, for once, Sheffield has got it right?

Mrs. Gillan

It does not surprise me. Labour's education policies are in a shambles. Labour Members say one thing and do another. I agree with the teachers in Sheffield who say that they lack confidence in every stage of the process—the leadership, the planning and the allocation and delivery of funding to Sheffield's education system. That is the true picture of Labour, and the true picture of what Labour would be like in power.

Mr. Spearing

Will there not be some need for new educational construction in the coming years, particularly in secondary education, due to the proper requirements of the new national curriculum? As the Government are publishing new guidelines in the summer, would it not be appropriate for them to work out the minimum cost per place which would be appropriate following the guidelines? If they do not do that, will not some other official agency do it and show up the Government's irresponsibility in the matter?

Mrs. Gillan

The hon. Gentleman has participated in many debates on the subject, and he should be aware of the cost multipliers that are used, which are in excess of those areas that are laid out in the draft guidance. The cost multipliers are based on the real cost of providing new places and they are derived from an analysis of real projects. They represent a level being achieved by about a third of authorities and there is no reason why the rest cannot do the same.