HL Deb 18 December 1985 vol 469 cc832-47

4.42 p.m.

Debate resumed.

The Countess of Mar

My Lords, when I first saw the title of this debate on the Order Paper I, as no doubt did many of your Lordships, thought instantly of the recreational and vocational adult evening classes which for many years have taken place in educational premises all over the country. I am immensely grateful, and very genuinely grateful, to the noble Lord, Lord Stewart of Fulham, who has brought this subject to our attention, for I have had my eyes opened to a facet of education about which I knew very little.

As a beneficiary of continuing education, I was prompted to inquire further into community education and I discovered in my own county of Hereford and Worcester that such a scheme was in the process of development. Frankley is just within the borders of Hereford and Worcester administratively, but most local people think of it as the fringe of the City of Birmingham. About 10 years ago a new housing estate was developed to accommodate some of the families at the top of the Birmingham housing list under an urban resettlement programme. By definition, these families are what we tend to describe as "problem families". But I prefer to think and talk of them as families with problems, many of which arise through no fault of their own.

I am told by the community workers that at first it was very difficult to get any kind of neighbourly relationships off the ground, because families, while not necessarily regarding themselves as social outcasts, would regard their neighbours as such and would have nothing to do with them. The quality of housing on the estate was good, hut, because of the financial strictures imposed towards the end of the last decade, the local authority was unable to provide the recreational amenities, such as playgrounds and a swimming pool, which would have helped to build up a community spirit. The adults felt isolated, taken away from their family network. Unable to afford transport to help them keep in touch with their relatives, they tended to withdraw into themselves.

It is difficult for us in our position to visualise the social deprivation endured by these families. Over and over again, we, with our totally different standards, tell them to "Get on their bikes" or "Pull themselves up by their bootlaces". When you are at the bottom of the heap it is extremely difficult to do so on your own, and we really must accept and understand this if we are to help those who are less fortunate than ourselves.

Fortunately for this community, there are some people with vision who are prepared to try to help them. When the high school was planned and built six years ago it was as a cost-effective multi-use building. As well as the normal school facilities, it houses a public library, a youth centre, a day centre for the elderly and disabled, a sports hall and a small theatre. It also has above average craft facilities. It is not just a high school. It is the Frankley community high school. It benefits tremendously from a system of single line management. The headmaster of the school is also the warden of the site. There is also very close cooperation with the two first and two middle schools on the estate.

The high school provides the normal full-time courses for children until they reach 16, but there is also an in-built flexibility which enables some young people to take part-time courses in some subjects when they are 14. Two years ago, instead of the normal sixth forms, a post-I6 centre was developed. There was a steering committee whose members came from the Manpower Services Commission, the TUC, Cadbury's, Kalamazoo and the various county agencies. Students of all ages—literally 16 to 90—are able to take a great variety of courses, both recreational and vocational, and often the one will lead into the other.

The value of this to a community where standard adult classes are beyond their financial reach, and often at inconvenient times, cannot be measured. Many of the courses are free; some are pay-as-you-learn. There is an open learning scheme operated in conjunction with the National Extension College, where adults can buy, or be helped to buy, the materials necessary for their course. The post-16 coordinator is available on Thursday evenings with other tutors who provide any advice and assistance which may be required. There is also an outreach programme—and other noble Lords have spoken about the outreach programme—to help adults become literate and numerate. Many are too ashamed of their inadequacy to join a class, so in the initial stages they are taught individually in their own homes. I will say more of that later.

The centre is also the local managing agency for the Mode A YTS scheme and has the county agency for Mode B. Their community education programme includes courses for young people not accepted for YTS and for those who have failed to find employment, following a YTS course, at no charge. There is a matrix of studies which caters for several levels of students. For example, there are four computer courses running concurrently, between which students can move freely according to their ability.

To ease the transition from school to a technical or vocational education, there are plans afoot to rent an industrial unit which will contain a range of equipment needed to provide a sound training. It is expected to cost about £140,000 to set up and the headmaster has already received pledges of over £100,000. Unfortunately, the county council is unable to help, because its education budget is stretched beyond its limits, but interest has been shown by a number of agencies and by local industrialists. The idea for the unit arose from the EC publication Policies for Transition. It cuts out the fragmentation which has arisen from the seeming multitude of courses available to young people and the adult unemployed.

A little over two years ago, those involved with the adults and children on the estate realised that more needed to be done to help them feel that they were worthwhile citizens. Most of the families are larger than average with a preponderance of very young children, there are a number of single-parent families, and all of them have suffered bad experiences with authority in one way or another. The schools were receiving children with severe behavioural problems, not because the parents did not care—they simply did not know how to cope.

A project team, funded by urban aid grants, was set up with the brief to make a beneficial environment for the children. The team is led by an educational psychologist. Working with her are two teachers. They have gone out to all the homes on the estate and have made people welcome. It has been an enormous effort on their part, but a very worthwhile one. They have built up a rapport between home and school, by working with parents in their homes and encouraging them to help in the schools. They started initially with individual parents, then with small groups and now have built up enough confidence for parents to work together in their children's year groups.

The two teachers taught themselves by trial and error to teach adults the skills of literacy and numeracy and have now trained eight lay people as well. The scheme has grown through working with the parents, together with their children. Many of the adults had bad school experiences but now, with encouragement and support, are as keen as their children to learn.

Next term, on five Saturdays, there is to be a family workshop at the high school. The premises will be opened more widely than they usually are at weekends. There will be a market where people will be able to sell craft items they have made, food and other produce. There will be sporting activities and demonstrations—this is the social bait and gradually courses on child development for parents, a workshop for parents and teenagers and specifically for teenagers, a "life of your own" project to help them balance their need for independence with the prospect of long-term unemployment. The community high school will not be seen as Big Brother, but as a place where adults and young people can meet and work together to develop their interests and skill.

The craft tutors will not give lessons as such but will provide support and advice on the use of equipment. The aim of the project team is to wean both adults and children from their dependence on outside agencies and to foster a confident independent, outward-looking attitude in those they help. Before the project comes to its end in three years' time they hope to have forged links between parents of pre-school children and nursery teachers. Recent tests have shown that children of four are 10 months behind in their language development, and this has been seen to affect children at an increasing rate into adult life. By encouraging parents to recognise the importance of language to children from birth they hope to eliminate some of the behavioural problems which give cause to anger and frustration or withdrawal later in life.

I have said that I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Stewart of Fulham. I am also grateful to the senior inspector of Hereford and Worcester county council, the headmaster of the community high school and the project leader with whom I have spoken. I am sure that they will also be grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Stewart, for they said to me that they feel as though they have suddenly been recognised from the wilderness. Their enthusiasm for their work seems to be boundless, and is remarkably infectious. I asked whether they had any problems. The first is that the days are too short. The second, that resourcing is too thin. They understand the problems in that area and hasten to say that Hereford and Worcester county council and other agencies give as much support as they can. The third and major worry is caused by the fact that they are working on the edge of a county shire and an urban conurbation.

They are very much aware that the Boundary Commission is to to sit within the next two years and the uncertainty over the possible transfer of Frankley from Hereford and Worcester to Birmingham is causing some anxiety. I know that the noble Earl the Minister can do nothing about their first problem, but may I suggest to him that he ask his right honourable friend in the other place to consider the creation of a fund, based on EC social fund lines, to support community education projects? May I also ask him whether it would be possible to obtain a statement of intent from the Boundary Commission which would enable this community to plan ahead with confidence? It is not just the teachers and those running it who are concerned, it is the local population.

It will probably take another 10 years for the value of this subtle form of family education or social engineering to become clear. My own impression is that such a positive means of providing education should be encouraged in every community, rural and urban alike, and that the people in that community can do nothing but benefit. Mind you, they must take part in it themselves and be willing to work hard themselves. I am sure that the noble Earl the Minister will agree.

4.53 p.m.

Baroness Phillips

My Lords, I, too, am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Stewart of Fulham, for introducing this subject. Education is never received with any great enthusiasm and certain other subjects would have filled the Benches all around the House. I think it is some indication of what we feel about education. Lloyd George was supposed to have said once that the Welsh have a passion for education, the Scots have a respect for education and the English have no particular objection to it. The older I grow the more I feel that this is the case. If we are going to get community education we have to get our own perspective on education right in the first place. I speak as a former teacher and one who has been involved in what was laughingly called adult education for many years.

The NUT had the best definition of education that we have ever had. They said that it was for the happiness and fulfilment of the human being, the wealth of the nation and the moral fibre of our society. At present—and let us make no mistake about this—education is tied almost entirely to the work ethic. Chidren are urged to pass exams to get qualifications. I was in a class the other day when the teacher said to one girl, "If you don't get more A levels you will end up in a shop". I thought that that was rather hard on the retail industry which offers some very good career prospects. I recall when I was in the convent that we were threatened with something different: "If you don't work harder you will end up on the streets", but that is a rather lucrative occupation, I gather, so I do not think they would threaten them with that.

There is little doubt that the whole emphasis is on earning a living. Work is understood in only one way in our society—and that is work for pay. That is how the unemployed become not only very distraught, because they do not have work that will bring them money, but feel rejected and less than useful. It also means the young married women with whom I worked and whom I prefer to call homemakers. I was rather depressed that the noble Lord pictured them chained to a prison of drudgery. I am not sure that homemakers see themselves in that way. It is the most skilled occupation there is and the one which would be most sadly missed if it were not there. But this is the group who always say, "I am only a housewife", because the feeling is that they are not paid by money. I think the description on an income tax form is "non-gainfully employed", but they are making a great contribution to the community.

There are also the retired. I have the privilege of being president of the Pre-retirement Association which speaks for 10 million people over the age of 60. How are they described in our work-orientated society? They are generally described as "geriatric has-beens". That applies to anybody over the age of 60. This is all an attitude of mind which flows through and permeates the whole of our educational system. What I have tried for years to point out—and this is why I am absolutely delighted that we are talking about this subject today—is that everybody has a contribution to make to society. I taught the dull and backward (as they were then called) for two years and this showed me that every human being has talents. Some have many talents. Everybody has at least one. Many people go through life without their real talent being discovered. They are always second best at everything. It also shows clearly that we do not appreciate the role of the voluntary societies. What do they do for us? They run budgets as great as those of many of the institutions in the City. I shall not go further than that because they probably do it much better. They open all kinds of opportunities. They have created all kinds of pioneer efforts.

These people would not be regarded as working because they are working in a different situation altogether. Our society wastes material and people because we do not give them the opportunity to make a contribution to society. Most children still leave school with a sigh of relief and say, "Right, that's the end of it". We as educationalists fail somewhere. We do not light the flame of learning as we should do. But happily over the years, thanks to the pioneers of whom we have heard so many of your Lordships speak so eloquently, there is a feeling more and more that education is not bounded by our school days, that education is something that is about living.

I was very intrigued with the story told by the noble Lord, Lord Stewart, about the American janitor. When I worked in voluntary education it was my duty to try to obtain the use of a classroom in order that my women's groups could meet there. First, I had to have long interviews with the director of education; then I had to have long interviews with the district education officer; then I had to have long interviews with the head teacher; and finally, and most important of all, I had to have a long interview with the caretaker. If anybody was going to block the way of having a classroom it was he.

I am happy to hear of the use that is now being made of schools. I think of the struggles—and I am talking about the 1950s—that I had working in the new towns and working on the new estates where thousands of young women were transplanted and isolated, the very people who wanted to use their skills and talents and to acquire more learning. Those were the groups we were working on for our community education. Occasionally there was a spark of enthusiasm and somebody would say, "Yes, you have come to the right place". I have held groups in every kind of situation your Lordships can imagine. They included an old aeroplane hangar and an old shop that still had a "fish and chips" sign over the window. Nevertheless, people came in their hundreds to those meetings. They came with the enthusiasm to acquire new skills so that they could make a contribution. If I had time, I could tell your Lordships many exciting stories about people who acquired knowledge that they never really realised they could acquire, simply through community education.

It is still the case that schools are closed far too much. I once worked out that schools and colleges are closed for as nearly as many days of the year as they are opened. Playgrounds are closed and playing fields are closed. I am very glad to hear that people have broken through the terrible tangle of red tape in order to get access to schools.

We formed through the women's groups all the things that we are hearing about today dealing with pre-school education, education for those returning to work, education for those who wish to acquire new skills for other reasons, education for those who formerly had not been considered literate enough to participate, and, finally, education for those about to retire.

It should be remembered that we are now to have bonus years. The Bible makes mention of three score years and ten but now we are to have four score years and ten. Still, it is not much use living longer if one is not actually doing anything with that extra time. Here is another opportunity that community education is certainly taking on board. I had the privilege of visiting one of the community education centres in Bedford. It was a centre with a difference; one could only be admitted if one was aged over 50. Nothing so enhances the value of something as to give it some degree of exclusivity. At that centre every kind of language was being taught. Every type of skill was being imparted to the people there, who will now be able to make a contribution to society during their bonus years.

The community education movement has a great future but it needs much more encouragement. If this debate does nothing more than give it publicity then it will have been right to have it. But we are closing schools for various reasons. As a teacher, I see falling rolls in a different light from the Government. I see them as an opportunity to have at last small classes and to provide some children with the one-to-one situation that they deserve. But, no—schools are going to be closed. Let us not close those schools. Let us keep them as centres of community education. They would bring in far more people, who would not feel that they were in a school situation. The people are there who want that kind of education but they are not sure how to approach it. It is an exciting movement that deserves every help and encouragement. I hope that today's debate will stimulate that help and encouragement in some way.

5.3 p.m.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey

My Lords, in adding my thanks to my noble friend Lord Stewart of Fulham, I know that he will be less impressed by my thanks than he will be gratified by the response there has been to the debate he so ably introduced. Every speaker has referred to particular examples of good community education. The noble Lord, Lord Ritchie, spoke of London and Sussex; the noble Baroness, Lady Carnegy, of Scotland; the right reverend Prelate, of Leicester; my noble friend Lord Ardwick, of the Cranford Community School in Hounslow; the noble Countess, Lady Mar, of I suppose it is now Hereford and Worcester but it may be Birmingham in the future; and my noble friend Lady Phillips, of Bedford. We have an impressive array of evidence that what was called by my noble friend Lady Phillips the community school movement does have a record of success on the ground in many parts of the country.

The question is not why this debate is being held now, because its importance is quite clear. The question arises: why has it not been held long before now? I shall not return to the subject of village colleges and Henry Morris because it has been covered very ably already. However, I want to return to Archbishop Temple in the time before the Education Act 1944, when he described education as being the cure to the evil of mental slavery, which he described as being as important as economic slavery as a scourge on our society. It is worth trying to look in policy terms at why at this particular time we need to be thinking again about the nature of our schooling and about why we need to be looking, in the terms of the Motion, at the effect of education on work and employment policies.

Traditionally, education has been one of the seven ages of man. Shakespeare described, the whining school-boy, with his satchel and shining morning face, creeping like snail unwillingly to school". If that is still sometimes the case, it is certainly not the case in the schools that have been described by many noble Lords this afternoon. However, it appears to me to be the case that the nature of schooling and the need for schooling is changing quite dramatically. I suggest that there is a need to raise standards in school. I do not mean that simply in the literal sense of increasing the number of examination successes, although the number has increased and is being increased. Bearing in mind the fact that there are still substantial sections of our population—women, ethnic minorites, and so on—who achieve lower examination results, the scope for a further improvement in that limited sense is still considerable.

There is the need to raise standards also in the much more important sense of giving those who are benefiting from education not only a better understanding of society around them but also the power to make their own contribution to a better society. I suggest that the kind of "adolescent ghettos", to use the phrase of Mrs. Anne Jones, the head of Cranford Community School, that still account for too many of our secondary schools are not the right place in which to achieve the raising of standards that I believe to be necessary.

Then again, the nature of work has been changing and many noble Lords have referred to that point. Traditionally the position has been that we think of work as being the only criterion of proper involvement and self-respect in our society. We think of work in a restrictive way; in the sense of being a year-round lifetime's occupation for usually one wage-earner per household. All of those preconceptions are breaking down. Work is becoming more flexible and our attitude towards work is also changing. We have less of the work ethic that was described earlier. We still want to work but we value our leisure and the flexibility that different work patterns make possible for us.

Only last week we discussed in this House the whole question of the contribution that higher education ought to make in the very great need for continuing education and lifetime learning. We discussed the undoubted fact that the potential demand for continuing education is very great. It is far greater than had been anticipated even 10 years go. It is not just a question of demographic demand. With falling rolls at our schools, there is an increasing complement of adults aged from 30 to 60, and indeed older, who are candidates for continuing education. There is also the experience, particularly through the Open University, of a huge, undiminishing and unmet demand for continuing education regardless of the initial qualifications of those who want to take part in it.

All those indications, it seems to me, show the importance of community education in our society.

What do we mean by that and how does it affect the various age groups? First, at 14 to 18 there are a number of traditional barriers which need to be broken down if we are to improve the performance and contribution of the educational system. It has always seemed to me that the distinction between education and vocational training is a very dangerous and a very limiting distinction. Unfortunately, it is now enshrined in the terms of reference of the Department of Education and Science on the one hand and the Manpower Services Commission on the other. I am going to suggest there there are things within the ambit of community education that can be done about that.

It always seemed to me that the break between education and work has been far too finite and far too complete and that work experience while young people are still participating in virtually full time education has a very great part to play; just as continuing education experience while young people are earning has a very great part to play. I am glad to say that for many years government programmes—this is not a party political point, they still continue—have served to some extent to break down that barrier.

As well as breaking down barriers I suggest that there need to be very considerable changes in the method of working in our secondary schools. It is not just a matter of the best use of the physical resources, although that is quite an important point and one that has been made on a number of occasions this afternoon. If we are to have a more flexible use of our physical resources surely that means that we must be thinking positively about more modular programmes which can be adapted to the wider variety of people who are to take part in them. Certainly we have to become accustomed to the idea of mixed age teaching; that is a critical point in community education.

I shall not refer at any length to the tertiary education sector because this was a subject of debate last week, but it is clear that if it is to take part in the kind of community education, which noble Lords have applauded, the higher and further education sector should be thinking again about the nature of the access it makes available. It must consider the extent to which it makes available education for those without formal qualifications, the extent to which it modernises the qualifications which are now required, and the extent to which it makes provision for minorities and the disadvantaged of various kinds.

The really important thing is what it does for adults. So many adults in our communities are now in a situation where a more open educational structure could be providing enormous help for them. Obviously we start with the adults who missed out on schooling; those who missed out on basic education. We have heard from a number of noble Lords about the continuing problems of adult illiteracy; those who missed out on the special measures which are now widely available but were certainly not widely available during the formative years of most of the people in our workforce.

There are the needs of those who have missed out on vocational training not because there was less vocational training in the past but because the vocational training which took place was for skills which are now no longer required and because most of the skills which are required started during the working life of the large part of our workforce. So the need for lifelong learning and the need for provision for the unemployed, the handicapped and the disadvantaged of various kinds is an essential element of the community education movement.

I think it is possible to put forward a number of different levels at which community education could be organised, starting from the very simplest level of the dual use of the physical facilities and going on to, I suppose, the do-gooder image where it is thought that the education authorities and educationists, being the "haves" in our society, go out to the community and offer of their bounty, their wisdom, to the "have nots" in the community. A much more realistic and hopeful view of this is where the educationists are a little more humble and recognise that there is a great deal to be learnt from the community itself, and where therefore the interaction of the education sector and the community is the essence of community education and where everybody—the educationists themselves, the pupils of school age and the adult pupils—are all learners and teachers in this society.

It is possible to go further and to have almost mystical views about the community as being some sort of indication of a higher quality of life. It is possible to go further and think of education and the community as being the agents for change in our society. I do not go that far. I am content that at a relatively practical level we can think of community schools as contributing to a greater sense of understanding among all of us of the nature of each other's problems and opportunities.

So where does this lead us in policy terms? I think there are a number of areas where not just Government but local education authorities, parents, and above all those engaged in full time education, must adapt to change if we are to achieve the objectives and to match the achievements which have been described this afternoon. I must say first that I have a severe doubt about some of the suggestions concerning parent involvement in schools. I do not refer to parent involvement in governing bodies—that is a matter for legislation which we understand is to come in February and I do not wish to anticipate that debate—but I know that if I were at school now I would not particularly want my parents to be attending the school and learning alongside me. I seem to remember that being at school was a welcome opportunity to make a break with my home background and to have a whole different set of social and other opportunities. If we mix too much home life and school life at family level there are a certain number of dangers.

In policy terms, what are the implications for the Government and for other participants in the education process? I suggest that the most important is teacher training. It is a fact that a very considerable proportion of our teachers now in service were trained at a time when in most training colleges and institutions the idea was that education was the communication of information one way; where the teacher stood in front of the class and the class absorbed knowledge. It will be extremely difficult for many teachers to learn that in many cases it does not work in that way. Certainly pupils learn from each other at least as much as they learn from teachers and also the teachers themselves can continue to improve by the way in which they learn from the pupils. What is actually required is what the French call a déformation professionnelle rather than a further formation professionnelle. I believe that the Government should give an indication that it is prepared to devote resources and give practical encouragement to the re-training of teachers in that way.

The continuous use of school buildings will make for a number of difficulties which local education authorities may encounter and which the Government may help to resolve. I believe that there are some instances in which the existing terms and conditions of service for teachers inhibit the kind of change which we have been describing this afternoon, and it is only the goodwill of the teachers in assenting to and participating in activities which, strictly speaking, do not form part of their duties that enables it to take place. I would suggest that the Government ought to be looking at the terms and conditions of teachers in such a way that they may have wider obligations but can also benefit from the exercise of those wider obligations.

As regards education and the training sector, we have heard some encouraging examples this afternoon of the way in which MSC activity is in fact taking place in schools. My noble friend Lord Ardwick described a Cranford community school, where a substantial amount of money comes from courses for women who wish to return to work which are funded both by MSC money and by European Community money. As we move into the two-year YTS programme, in the course of the next year, it seems to me that unless many more of the YTS activities are centred in our schools and colleges it is not really going to be doing as good a job as it ought to be.

We ought also perhaps to consider whether the CPVE ought not to take place at an earlier age with more work experience, and the full YTS to start at 17 years, but there perhaps I am going beyond the terms of reference of the Motion this afternoon. Yet these are important matters on which the Government ought at least to be giving guidance and help and probably in many cases funding.

The revival of the adult and continuing education effort, which to some extent has been shunted off into a corner after the expiry of the term of the Advisory Council in Adult and Continuing Education, ought now to be considered. Above all, in the light of the terms of this Motion, we should be thinking much more of the links of employers with schools and the Government ought to be giving every encouragement that they can to a movement which I know is increasing now through the local efforts of schools to make contact with employers and employers to make contact with the schools.

In the coming years, with the change in the age of our population, we do have a real opportunity to take advantage of it and to make our schools more relevant to our society. I spoke at the beginning of my speech about the schools consisting of the whining schoolboys, which is the second of Shakespeare's "Ages of Man". I think perhaps we might exempt, the infant, mewling and puking in the nurse's arms and maybe also the seventh age of, Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything", and perhaps also we ought not to be arguing too much for vocational training for the soldier and the lover. But with those exceptions, education is about all the ages of men and women; and it has been very helpful and inspiring for me to be able to listen to the speeches in the debate this afternoon.

5.25 p.m.

The Earl of Swinton

My Lords, I should like to congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Stewart of Fulham, on his success in the ballot, and to thank him and all the other noble Lords and Baronesses who have spoken for their contributions to this illuminating, well-informed and good-tempered debate. We have had the benefit of a wealth of experience, and a wide range of important and interesting issues have been aired.

I should like to start by reminding your Lordships of the Government's principal aims for all sectors of education. These were described in the White Paper, "Better Schools" (Cmnd. 9469), which was published earlier this year, in the following terms: To raise standards at all levels of ability; and to secure the best possible return for the resources which are found for education". That is the context within which this debate is set. The premises, equipment and specialist knowledge and skills of teachers which are found in our schools and colleges are very valuable assets. All of them have a role to play in widening the scope of the overall educational offering to the community.

Noble Lords have already reminded us of the historical background. Community education is no modern innovation, though like so much in the education system it is a fluid concept which is influenced by changing needs and is shifting constantly in its emphasis as it seeks to meet them. It is a well-established facet of provision, which in some areas goes back for very many years. In other areas it is a notion which is only just beginning to take root. Its form is infinitely variable. I think it was the noble Lord, Lord Ritchie of Dundee, who said that it came in 112 varieties. On my arithmetic, if we gave it two more, it could be known as "Super-Heinz".

Few would disagree in principle with the broad aim of wider use of educational provision and premises, especially school and college premises, by the community at large. But that general aim conceals the range of community use which exists. At its simplest, it may amount to no more than the use of school premises or playing fields in the evenings or at weekends by adults or young people. That kind of use is now, I am very glad to tell the noble Baroness, Lady Phillips, very widespread, with 79 per cent. of all maintained schools in regular use outside school hours in term time and almost all secondary schools in such use.

At the other extreme, community education encompasses extensive use during days, evenings and weekends of purpose-built combined educational and community accommodation by a number of different groups, from the very young to senior citizens, as we have heard so eloquently described by the right reverend Prelate, the Bishop of Leicester. Often, some of the buildings in that kind of use have been provided with the aid of funds from the Sports Council and the district council.

The Government welcome the steady growth in community education, both within the authorities already committed to the concept and among those now taking it up for the first time. In some cases, falling school rolls have provided the opportunity for the release of surplus accommodation which can be used for the benefit of the wider community—and I was delighted that the noble Baroness, Lady Phillips, made mention of this.

The Department of Education and Science has sought to give practical encouragement to such developments where school closures are not possible through the design guidance of its Architects and Building Group. One recent example is Design Note 42 (1985), "Dukeries Complex—A Place for the Family" which describes a joint project by the Department's Architects and Building Group and county and district authorities in Nottinghamshire to adapt the buildings of a large secondary school to provide social, educational, sporting and recreational facilities for all sections of the local community, from toddlers to pensioners. I was lucky enough to be sent a copy of this paper with my brief and I found it an absolutely rivetting document. I would advise any of your Lordships who are interested in this particular facet of education to get hold of this document and read it.

Our schools are rich in valuable resources, both in terms of the skills and specialist knowledge of their teachers and in their buildings and equipment. It is obviously desirable to seek to use those resources as effectively as possible in meeting the many challenges which we, as a society, face today. That is a message which has come through loud and clear from everyone who has spoken in this debate.

There is a wide measure of agreement among educationists that a school's relationship with parents and with its local community is an essential indicator of its professional health. The education service has a role to play in meeting the increased demand for vocational preparation, for wider leisure facilities, and in contributing toward holding a community together, reducing vandalism and in overcoming alienation among disadvantaged groups. Nor are the benefits necessarily confined to the community outside the school. It may well be that the wider use of a school provides opportunities for the pupils to serve the community to its benefit and theirs—and there are many interesting and heartening examples of this to be found. Equally, the presence of adults in a school may have a noticeable effect in improving overall standards of pupil behaviour.

Of course, there is another side to the coin. The school population is declining in most areas and comparatively few new schools are being built. There is therefore only limited scope for the provision of new purpose-built community accommodation. Some existing buildings may not readily lend themselves to wider use by adults. There can also be difficult issues of staffing to resolve. Above all, the educational needs of the pupils themselves must be safeguarded.

As to the Government's position, they have always been supportive of the aim of community education and will continue to be so. But development depends heavily upon resources; and it is for local education authorities to decide upon the pattern of their educational provision and upon the allocation of resources to meet their chosen priorities. It would not therefore be right for central Government to rush local education authorities into a particular direction. Consistent encouragement has been given for the community use of maintained school premises and the Government hope that local authorities would continue to promote such use so far as practicable within the resources available to them.

I think that I detected only one small criticism of the Government in the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Stewart. He said that the Government showed no interest whatsover in the subject. I must spend a little time contradicting that. My right honourable friend and his Ministerial colleagues are well aware of the range of community provision which exists in England. In the course of their visits to local education authorities they have of course seen a number of community schools and colleges and will continue to do so. My honourable friend the Minister of State had a useful exploratory discussion last month with representatives of the Community Education Development Centre, and he will have in mind when he visits educational establishments the points which were put to him in that discussion. The Department of Education and Science has published a number of reports by Her Majesty's Inspectorate on individual community schools and colleges together with advice on technical matters by its architects and building group.

I take note of the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Stewart, and endorsed by my noble friend Lady Carnegy of Lour that there is a need for the LEAs to get together for discussions and to circulate ideas among themselves. It is a most interesting suggestion, and I shall pass that and a number of other suggestions that have been made to my right honourable friend.

I think that I am having a fairly easy time, as I cannot remember ever having been asked so few questions. I was interested in the points raised by my noble friend Lady Carnegy. I am grateful to her for reminding us that community education includes the need to help those who are not likely to come forward themselves and who might be frightened off even by the relatively informal setting of a community school. I join her and the noble Baroness, Lady Phillips, in paying tribute to the many volunteers who are prepared to go out to where need exists.

I agree that we should recognise the importance of the many learning opportunities that exist within the community to assist with the personal development of those who need help. I believe that education authorities are becoming increasingly aware of those opportunities and are prepared to develop them. They will doubtless take note of what is being achieved by their colleagues in Scotland. I am sure that we can all be grateful to my noble friend for bringing a Scottish dimension to the debate.

The noble Countess asked two specific questions. The first was on additional finance, and here I am afraid that I have to play Scrooge. My right honourable friend has recently announced his plan for local authority expenditure on education for 1986–87 (on 12th November). Those plans provide for a cash increase of nearly 6 per cent. over the previous year. Nevertheless, the increase falls short of authorities' wishes and will demand a considerable degree of economy. There can be no further increase upon the announced figures, given the overall need to restrain public expenditure.

The noble Countess also asked about trying to get the Boundary Commission not to move part of, I think it was, Hereford and Worcester into Birmingham. I am speaking off the cuff, but I imagine the answer is that if the Government were seen in any way to try to influence the Boundary Commission, even for the most brilliant of reasons, we should get into the most appalling trouble in the press.

The Countess of Mar

My Lords, I was not exactly asking for the area not to be moved from Hereford and Worcester into Birmingham but for a decision to be made as to whether it was to be moved, so that whichever local authority it is going to can plan and finance plans for the future.

The Earl of Swinton

My Lords, as I say, I am speaking entirely off the cuff and may be giving erroneous information, in which case I shall write to the noble Countess. I know that the timetables of the Boundary Commission are firmly planned and I doubt whether it will be possible, but I shall certainly look into the matter and write to the noble Countess.

The noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, asked about conditions of service for teachers. There can be difficult issues of teachers' conditions of service to resolve, and conditions of service for school teachers are not entirely the same as those for teachers in further education establishments, as indeed he pointed out. But those are matters which need to be resolved locally and on an individual basis. Given good will it has almost always been possible to overcome any problems that have arisen.

I think that we are at one in our support for the concept of community education; and we are at one in our desire to see a continued growth in its development. Where some of us differ is about the means by which that continued growth can best be achieved. I would not accept that pressure from the centre is necessarily the best way to achieve that. Indeed, such pressure might well be counter-productive. The development of community schools and colleges needs to arise from clearly identified local demands which have been properly discussed and agreed between the partners locally—that is to say, the community at large, the parents of pupils, the staff of the schools and other agencies concerned, and governing bodies and local authorities.

There are difficult issues to be faced and problems to be overcome. They include the identification of needs, educational issues, organisational issues, and often financial issues. Solutions cannot be imposed on those who will need to work together harmoniously to identify priorities and to solve the problems which arise. There must be a genuine willingness on their part to work together; and it is right therefore that the initiative should come from the local rather than the national level. For their part, the Government will continue to try to respond to initiatives in a helpful spirit and to disseminate widely the experience of successful practice.

This has been a valuable debate which reflects the breadth of experience which is to be found in this House. A number of interesting suggestions have been made and my right honourable friend will be taking careful note of them. I am grateful to my noble friend and to the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, for making suggestions about the MSC and the YTS, and I shall endeavour to see that other of my right honourable and honourable friends also have the views of your Lordships on these matters.

I have nothing more to say except once again to thank the noble Lord, Lord Stewart, for what has been a happy and interesting debate. I am glad to say that I have learnt a lot. Perhaps it is because Christmas is in the air, but I think that it has been a good afternoon.

Lord Stewart of Fulham

My Lords, I wish to express my thanks to those noble Lords who have contributed to the debate and enriched it with so many varied experiences. We have had as good as one could expect from a member of the Government on almost any topic. It is not in my nature to say much more than that about any member of any government. But for what it is, I say it. I only hope that those zealous people up and down the country who are engaged in the work of community education will feel that we have given them a fair run and interested the Government, the House and perhaps a wider audience in the valuable work that they are doing. With that, I ask leave to withdraw the Motion for Papers.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.