§ 9. Mr. Laurence RobertsonWhat steps he is taking to ensure that the extra money allocated by the Government to local authorities is actually allocated to schools' budgets. [18754]
§ Mr. BlunkettI have written to the leaders of all local authorities with responsibility for education to emphasise that the £1,017 million additional funding for next year should be applied directly for the benefit of children in our schools so that the average 5.7 per cent. increase can be applied directly to raising standards.
§ Mr. RobertsonI thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. I remind him that there is a difference between schools and education. As he has written to all local authorities, why did the Labour group on Gloucestershire county council vote just two weeks ago not to pass all the money on to schools? It was only because of the Conservative group that the motion to do so was carried.
§ Mr. BlunkettI am always in favour of Conservative authorities following Government policy, and passing on the 5.9 per cent. increase in standard spending assessment allocated to Gloucestershire. I hope that Gloucestershire county council, with the support of all three main political parties, will apply itself to the provision of nursery education, which it has neglected over the years.
§ Mr. Bill O'BrienThere is no doubt that Labour local education authorities will see that the money goes to education. There are still several large metropolitan authorities where there is a discrepancy in the amount allocated per student for education, particularly in the SIGOMA group—the Special Interest Group of Metropolitan Authorities. Will my right hon. Friend quickly examine that situation with a view to levelling up the imbalance that exists because of the way the formula applies to some education authorities?
§ Mr. BlunkettI and my right hon. and hon. Friends in the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions accept that further work is required on ensuring that resources reach those parts of the country and those authorities that are in greatest need. That is why the Deputy Prime Minister announced changes a couple of weeks ago that will start the process of achieving greater equity and fairness across the country, including provision for nursery children on the basis of those funded rather than on the notional numbers in the authority—and, of course, on the actual rather than the notional capital debt that had accrued before 1990. There is still room for improvement, but we are taking those essential steps to ensure that authorities can apply fairly the resources made available to ensure that we have equal standards across Britain.
§ Mr. DorrellIs it not already clear that there is a yawning chasm between the Secretary of State's rhetoric about a 5.7 per cent. increase in the average standard spending assessment across the country and likely experience of head teachers in terms of the increase in their schools' budgets that they will receive when the councils set their budgets early next year? Is it not 1176 the case that the Secretary of State simply cannot deliver on the commitments that he is giving, and that his letter makes that clear?
Is it not also true that such increase as will be available next year to schools will be paid for by swingeing increases in council tax? Today's edition of the Evening Standard reports that in London the council tax will increase by 11 per cent. on average, and that in Brent and Tower Hamlets it is set to increase by between 16 and 20 per cent. Are Ministers ready for yet another revolt from the hon. Member for Brent, East (Mr. Livingstone)?
§ Mr. BlunkettI was not sure whether the right hon. Gentleman was in favour or against those councils raising the money to protect education and essential services. They will certainly make a choice at local level to apply resources to the Government's and the people's priority, which is to ensure that resources are given to schools to support their aim to raise standards. That is our policy.
We have made it clear that we shall monitor what local authorities do with that money. For the first time since capping was introduced, we have applied the actual revenue pound for pound to match the SSA provided at local level. That is in complete contrast with what the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friends did in the years when they were in government.
§ Dr. George TurnerDoes my right hon. Friend recognise, however, that Labour councillors face the difficult task—particularly given the changes in SSA and to social services—of having to make cuts in the provision of social services to people in order to deliver improvements in education? As a former education chairman of Norfolk county council, I know that such improvements are important and necessary. Those councillors will need to have a sympathetic hearing from Ministers during the consultation exercise on what in some cases will be dramatic changes in budgeting as a result of changes in the formula. Will my right hon. Friend use his good offices to ensure that representations from those who face such a difficult task are sympathetically heard?
§ Mr. BlunkettMy letter to the leaders of councils said that after 18 years of Conservative Government there would be difficulties in matching all the priorities and demands at local level. My hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Housing, who is present in the Chamber, is not only sympathetic but has managed with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health—whose cold I appear to have caught—to gain the provision of ring-fenced community care funding for the coming year, for an extra 12 months. That will help greatly to deal with the problem, which I accept exists, of matching demand and ensuring that we protect social services and the most vulnerable while at the same time matching the top priority of investing in standards in education.