§ Ms Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent, North)It gives me great pleasure to raise on the Adjournment an issue of such importance for my constituency. I welcome most warmly the Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment, my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, East (Mr. Howarth), to his new ministerial position. I am pleased that he is in his place for the debate.
Education is a burning issue in Stoke-on-Trent and in north Staffordshire. I, too, want to make education a crusade in the area that I represent. We must ensure during this debate that we put on the map the urgent education needs of Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire. Against that background, I make no apology for shouting loud and clear about what is needed.
During the tenure of the previous Government, we have seen the few, not the many, receive resources for education provision. The few, not the many, succeeded in securing fantastic educational achievement, while the rest of us were left to do the very best we could against all the odds.
We have heard much talk about failing schools, but it was the previous Government who failed us. More than anything else, I want now to press the case for fair education funding, and especially in Stoke-on-Trent and north Staffordshire.
Why do we want fair funding? We want it so that we might do the very best for our children. All parents want to do that, and that is the feeling of all parents in my constituency. I feel that also, speaking as a parent. That is why the debate on GCSE achievement is so important.
If we are to see any achievement, we need to have targets. We need to know where we are going and what resources are available. We need the good will of all those who are involved in making the necessary resources available. Above all else, we need the active co-operation of the Government. That is why it is so crucial that this debate is taking place.
We have, of course, the active support of two authorities, the new local education authority of Stoke-on-Trent, and the local education authority for Staffordshire as a whole. I can tell my hon. Friend the Minister, too, that all parents, governors and teachers, along with the organisation that will seek fairer funding for schools, want to be able to set targets, so that we can secure the achievements that are needed in the area.
Every school that serves its local community in meeting the needs of that community must have the resources properly to do its job. That is what I want to achieve from today's debate. I want an active partnership with the new Government. Ever since my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment visited the area in 1996 and saw for himself what was needed, my colleagues and I in Stoke-on-Trent and north Staffordshire have sought to establish such a partnership. It is crucial that we build on my right hon. Friend's visit in 1996.
I urge my right hon. Friend and the Government as a whole to review the standard spending assessment. The SSA is one of the most dreadful pieces of formula that I have ever come across, because it has siphoned funds from certain areas to others and left the area that I represent with huge areas of education spending deficit—more of that in a moment.
912 I urge the Government also to concentrate the £83 million that has been announced for education in the Budget on the areas that need it most. There are huge discrepancies in education resources and it is crucial that we concentrate on the areas that have done worst, at least to bring them up towards the level from which other areas start.
As a result of the debate, I want to get bids in under the schools renewal challenge fund round, so that my area can benefit. At the same time, I have a great deal of difficulty with the bidding culture per se. It always means that some areas get left out. If, however, we could achieve a fair SSA and bring funds into my area that it has not received in past years, I would wish to use the next round of the SRCF to increase achievement in Stoke-on-Trent.
As I said during questions on the statement when the White Paper on raising education standards was published, I want an area action zone for Stoke-on-Trent. That could make an enormous difference. It could enable a huge number of schools to work together in partnership. In my constituency, it could build on the Two Towns project, which has already done so much to raise standards, and could include other local schools, such as primary schools and nurseries. We could all benefit from that experience.
Not least, I want a visit, if not by my hon. Friend the Minister before the end of the present term, at least by an official from the Department, so that he or she can see what is needed to get Stoke-on-Trent and north Staffordshire off to a good start. I want the visit to take place before the end of the term, because there is a real sense of urgency. Children have only one chance at school. If they do not get good GCSE results and do not do well in their standard assessment tasks; if they do not do well at primary school because their literacy levels are so far behind those of others; or if there is not proper early learning, from which all education begins, how can children in that position do well? That is why there is a real sense of urgency.
I hope that the Minister will give me an undertaking that he will do his level best to ensure that someone from the Department visits the local education authorities in my area to see what is needed. I would want that official to visit schools in my constituency with me. I challenge anyone to tell me that the schools are not doing the very best they can in the circumstances in which they are operating.
Let us consider examination results in Stoke-on-Trent and certainly in Staffordshire. Excellent results are achieved in part of my constituency. There are excellent results in another part but, of course, everything is relative. I am slightly hesitant about mentioning results and naming schools, because we should not judge everything by results alone. We must, however, consider where we start from, and the starting point is low levels of achievement.
In Stoke-on-Trent, North we have above-average results in Endon and St. Margaret ward. In LEA-maintained schools in the city, results vary between 21 and 29 per cent. for five GCSEs at grades A to C. That is quite good progress in the city, given the starting baseline. When a comparison is made, it is clear that there has been a tremendous improvement over the past two or three years. At the same time, however, we have an 913 average GCSE achievement rate of 29 per cent., compared with 44 per cent. for all pupils in Staffordshire. The national average is even higher than 44 per cent.
That is where I rest my case. We are not doing our best by the young people in my area if we cannot improve their GCSE attainments while at the same time improving all their education opportunities right the way through school. That must be the starting point. It is not what I would like it to be, for I would wish it to be much better. However, I recognise that in reaching the present level of achievement, our teachers, staff and governors have worked round the clock. They have done what virtually no one could have been expected to do in getting examination results as high as they are.
There was significant improvement in Stoke-on-Trent between 1994 and 1996. That shows that our teachers, schools and children are working extremely hard. The Two Towns project has made an enormous difference, and I want all schools in my constituency to learn from it.
Those schools are in a deprived area. That is shown by the percentage of free school meals that are taken. The National Consortium for Examination Results has shown the link between performance at GCSE and free meal entitlement of pupils, and in our area there is a large take-up of free school meals. Moreover, the city's cognitive ability scores for year seven show that children are at a disadvantage. Attendance at libraries is low, and the chronological reading age of children going to secondary school at year seven is lower than it should be—in one school that applies to 159 children out of 270.
The standard spending assessment for Staffordshire is unfair and must be reviewed, because schools have received much less money. Primary funding for pupils in Stoke-on-Trent is £68 per child per school, which is 3.6 per cent. below the national average, and funding for secondary schools is £78 per child per school less. Funding below the national average in one year is bad enough, but when it is below average year on year, as it was under the previous Government, there is a huge cumulative effect. As a result, our larger secondary schools could be as much as £0.25 million worse off in any one year, and that figure builds up over the years.
The cumulative effect of underfunding goes right the way through early learning, primary and secondary school funding. Many of our school buildings are in a dreadful state of repair. The chief education officer for Stoke-on-Trent wrote to me before the debate. He said:
We are expecting our children to raise their eyes to the stars, when in terms of their educational environment many of them have to live in the gutter.?That is not an insult to our schools and our pupils. Because of the neglect and disrepair that we have inherited, we have our work cut out to look to the stars, set our sights high and aim for the best achievement by all our children.Teachers are actually doing the building work at Jackfields nursery school, so that we can set our sights on achievement in early learning. When the school at Ball Green was closed down, Holden Lane school was promised a refurbishment programme to accommodate the influx of children. That school was top of the old county council's list of urgent repair works and refurbishment before Stoke-on-Trent became a unitary authority, and it is still top of the list. We are still no further forward in getting the money for that essential work to be carried out. 914 All our schools require money for refurbishment, early learning, lifelong learning and sports facilities, and they want to maximise the money available from the lottery and from capital challenge. They want to make a concerted effort to obtain funding. I urge the Minister to ensure that the £83 million goes where it is most needed.
Against the background of neglect and deprivation, Stoke-on-Trent schools have achieved miracles. I mentioned the Two Towns project. I should like to pay tribute to all the teachers at Haywood high school, James Brindley high school and Brownhills high school for their hard work. In 1991, about 4 per cent. of children in those schools achieved five grade A to C GCSEs: that figure is now more than 20 per cent. That shows what we can do when we have the resources. In 1991, 77 per cent. of children took GCSEs, and now the GCSE entry figure is 100 per cent. That does not come cheap: it costs money. The staying-on rate was 20 per cent., and now it is 50 per cent. We have doubled our achievement levels. We should shout loud and clear about those achievements.
Teachers have said to me that in the coming year as many as four staff members in a school will have to leave because of a lack of funding. They believe that the momentum of achievement cannot be sustained without extra resources. I welcome the White Paper, because it will help us to maintain the momentum. I challenge everyone to take up this important issue.
I am aware that my time is running out, and I want the Minister to be able to respond to all the points that I have made. But I just want to mention an important event that is taking place today in my constituency. The pupils at Sneyd Green primary school are having their annual prize-giving day. I was to hand out the prizes, but it was not possible for me to rush up to Stoke-on-Trent by train and share this wonderful day with them, and then rush back. However, perhaps my time is better spent convincing the Minister that the prize we want from the new Labour Government is to have their full, undivided attention for educational need in Stoke-on-Trent.
We should be proud of our achievements, and should give our teachers the support that they need to do their best for the children whom I represent. I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this burning issue. It will not go away, and neither will I. I look forward to working with the Minister to get something done about education in Stoke-on-Trent.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mr. Alan Howarth)I warmly congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) on securing the debate, and on making the case for her constituents with eloquence, passion and depth of knowledge, and with the commitment that her constituents appreciate and all hon. Members greatly respect.
Education is central to the Government's mission, and I am extremely happy to respond to my hon. Friend. The purposes that she expressed are our purposes, and we want them to be realised in her constituency and across the country. The timing of the debate is appropriate, given the publication on Monday of our White Paper "Excellence in Schools".
I assure my hon. Friend that I shall personally bring her concerns to the attention of the Secretary of State. As she mentioned, my right hon. Friend visited her area, and he 915 will want to be kept closely informed. He is anxious that his Department and his ministerial colleagues should respond to her as constructively and effectively as possible. Her concerns are on the map, to use her phrase.
On Monday, my hon. Friend asked my right hon. Friend a question after his statement, causing him, as he said, to twinkle. He will continue to beam his friendly concern in her direction. The opportunity that he had to engage in discussion with teachers in her constituency was part of the consultation process that we want to maintain. Without that consultation and without a dialogue with teachers, we shall not develop the required policies, but with their assistance, we shall.
As my hon. Friend knows better than any of us, Stoke-on-Trent has suffered from the decline in traditional manufacturing industries, upon which the area had relied economically for a long time. The schools sector has had to bear an appreciable brunt of the wider economic difficulties. Many schools in her constituency, particularly in the primary sector, date back to the 19th century, and are not as well equipped as schools elsewhere to deliver the curriculum.
As my hon. Friend told the House, GCSE results—although excellent in some local schools—are, across the local education authority area, significantly lower than the overall average in England. In 1996, in five of the seven secondary schools in my hon. Friend's constituency, fewer than 30 per cent. of pupils attained five or more grades A to C, against an England average of 44.5 per cent. Let me say immediately, however—in agreement with my hon. Friend—that those schools should not be labelled failures. Far from it: they have been inspected, and have been found not to be failing.
I am happy to join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the schools in her constituency, and to teachers, other staff, governors and all who have contributed—through immensely hard work and dedication—to what has been achieved. Standards, including GCSE results, have been improved, and the achievement is underlined by the tact that it has taken place in such difficult circumstances. My hon. Friend mentioned the high proportion of children receiving free school meals, for instance. We recognise the difficulties faced by schools, and want schools in difficult areas to be able to do better. We want to give them the best support that we can provide.
We are fully sensitive to Stoke-on-Trent's problems, but it must be said that in far too many parts of the country standards in schools are not good enough. That is why our White Paper "Excellence in schools" sets out the Government's agenda for raising standards in schools across the nation. It sets out our intention to ensure that all schools improve, through partnership with all those committed to raising standards. Our overall approach to policy will be underpinned by six principles. Education will be at the heart of government. Policies will be designed to benefit the many, not just the few. My hon. Friend expressed passionate concern that that should be so, and we share that concern. The focus will be on standards, not structures. Intervention will be in inverse proportion to success. There will be zero tolerance of under-performance, and the Government will work in partnership with all those who are committed to raising standards.
916 What does that mean for my hon. Friend's constituency? The initiatives in the White Paper will lead to improved standards in our primary schools, providing a firm foundation for further learning. That is vital to achievement in secondary schools. We want all children to be able to read and write fluently, handle numbers competently and concentrate on their work by the time they leave primary school. There will be high-quality education for all four-year-olds whose parents want it, and targets for the provision of places for three-year-olds. We will create a network of early excellence centres to spread good practice. There will be effective assessment of all children starting primary school. We will ensure that there are class sizes of 30 or fewer for five, six and seven-year-olds by 2002. We have set national literacy and numeracy targets and strategies for primary schools, and there will be a sharper focus on literacy and numeracy in the primary curriculum.
At secondary level, we will ensure that we develop the diverse talents of all pupils. Schools need to provide the most effective forms of teaching and learning, using new technologies where appropriate, and being encouraged to develop specialisms. We believe that secondary schools should normally set pupils according to ability. We will provide best-practice resources for schools to help them to establish the most effective ways of teaching and learning.
We will develop a national grid for learning, which will provide up-to-date teaching and resource material. There will be better-developed information and communications technology within a clear national strategy, including better initial teacher training and the training of existing teachers. We will create up to 25 education action zones, to be phased in over two or three years throughout the country in areas with under-performing schools and the highest levels of disadvantage. The zones will enable us to target education support and development where it is most needed, with additional flexibilities so that action can be taken to raise standards.
My hon. Friend has made it plain, on Monday and again today, that she wants an education action zone in Stoke-on-Trent. I hear what she says, but, as I know she will understand, I cannot at this point announce or predict the locations of the zones. The White Paper kicks off a wide consultation, which will include consultation on the way in which education action zones should work and the way in which they should be chosen. We shall develop our ideas, and, during the consultation, we shall expect schools and local education authorities to present their own ideas and proposals.
What I can say now is that the improvement that we all want to see in Stoke-on-Trent's schools will come about only through the new partnership that we aim to forge. Schools themselves are the key to raising standards. They will set their own targets, but they need help—not unnecessary interference, but practical help—from their partners in central and local government. The White Paper sets out what we in central Government will do; it also identities what we want LEAs to see as their rule.
Every LEA will draw up an education development plan showing the targets that it has agreed with its schools, and explaining how it proposes to support them so that the targets are achieved. The plans will be approved by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, and each LEA will have one in place by April 1999. LEAs will have an important role in advising and, when 917 necessary, challenging schools when they are setting their targets. We have provided a clear job description for LEAs, but, in return, they will become fully accountable.
Although some of the schools in my hon. Friend's constituency remain in Staffordshire, most are with Stoke-on-Trent's LEA. I am well aware that that LEA has existed only since April this year. I noted my hon. Friend's praise for both LEAs, and I am happy to endorse what she said. I stress that I have no reason whatever to suspect that the new LEA is failing to do its best for the children of its area. I know that Stoke-on-Trent is desperately keen to use its new unitary status to meet its people's needs, and I assure my hon. Friend that the Government, through my Department, want to work closely with the authority. I shall ensure that at the earliest opportunity—in response to my hon. Friend's specific request—the territorial team from my Department revisits Stoke-on-Trent to discuss in detail the issues that my hon. Friend raised today.
Some of the most important issues involve resources. My hon. Friend particularly mentioned school buildings. We announced in the Budget that £1.3 billion would be available—£83 million in the current year, as my hon. Friend reminded us—for schools to start tackling the backlog of repairs. Guidance on how the money will be distributed will be issued to LEAs in the very near future.
My hon. Friend mentioned revenue funding. She powerfully expressed the view that Staffordshire, and now Stoke-on-Trent, deserved more than the standard spending assessment had provided in the past and provided now. She called the SSA a dreadful formula, and said, making her point strongly, that she considered it to bear unfairly on her local education authorities. I can say only that we appreciate the importance of the issue, the strength of my hon. Friend's feelings and her determination. As she knows, we are reviewing the current formula in 918 consultation with local authority representatives, and we must hear what they have to say before we make final decisions about the 1998–99 SSAs in the autumn.
§ Ms WalleyThere is particular concern about how new unitary authorities with no experience will deal with the revised SSA formula that we want. Will my hon. Friend pay particular attention to that?
§ Mr. HowarthMy hon. Friend is obviously right. It is, of course, necessary for us to do what she suggests. We must listen and we must be fair to all authorities, but my hon. Friend can be assured that the case that she has made, and the case that her local authorities make, will be considered carefully, constructively and sympathetically by those in the Government with responsibility for such matters. It is too soon to predict the effect that any changes would have on individual authorities, but the views of local government about possible changes to the formula are of key importance.
I hope that my hon. Friend feels that she made the right decision when she decided not to visit her school today, although she would have loved to be there and I know that the school would have loved to have her there. She has fought doughtily here for it and all schools. Like her, I want Stoke-on-Trent and Staffordshire children to be able to look to the stars.
§ It being Two o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
§ Sitting suspended, pursuant to Standing Order No. 10 (Wednesday sittings), till half-past Two o'clock.