Education Reform Act: Opting Out (Hansard, 23 April 1990)

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science has approved 36 of the 47 proposals for grant-maintained status which have so far reached him for decision. More schools have now been approved for grant-maintained status than the number of secondary schools in over half of English LEAs. Some 18 schools were in being last September and there are now 28 such schools. A further eight will open in September and a further 12 proposals have been published and will reach Ministers for decision in a few weeks' time. A further five more proposals are awaited following parental ballots which have gone in favour of grant-maintained status. In total ballots have taken place in 84 schools, of whch 64 have voted in favour of grant-maintained status and 20 have voted against.

§ Lord Gainford
My Lords, I thank my noble friend the Minister for that Answer, which gave many useful figures. Is she aware that the Shadow Secretary of Education and Science in another place has declared that a future Labour Government would abolish grant-maintained schools? That would thus rob parents of the choice of grant-maintained education for their children.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, yesterday I heard the Shadow Secretary for Education declare that that was the intention of the Labour Party. However, it would be difficult to square with the idea that people should have a choice in these matters. We would certainly oppose any denial of choice.

§ Lord Taylor of Blackburn
My Lords, I wish to ask the Minister a non-political question. Can she give us a geographical breakdown of where these schools which have opted out are?

§ Baroness Blatch
No, my Lords, not without notice. However, the information regarding which schools have opted out and where they are situated is available. I can send the noble Lord a list of the schools if he wishes it.

§ Baroness Cox
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the track record of the 20 or so grant-maintained schools that are already up and running; is extremely good and that they are popular with parents? Can she give some indication of the 310 extent to which these grant-maintained schools are oversubscribed?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, it is of course early days yet but certainly all the signs are encouraging. It is right to say that in every single case applications for places at the grant-maintained schools are substantially greater than in previous years. In most cases applications have increased by 40 or 50 per cent.

§ Lord Ritchie of Dundee
My Lords, is it not the case that a great majority, if not all, of the schools which have opted out of local authority control were threatened with closure, and that is the main reason for their decision?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, that is not the case. It is certainly true that some of the schools which have opted out have been threatened with amalgamation or closure, but only 40 per cent. of the 36 schools which have been approved for opting out were scheduled for closure by their LEAs at the time of the parental ballot. Of those schools only three of the 18 schools where ballots have been held but where decisions have not yet been taken were scheduled for closure at the time of the ballots.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, the noble Baroness said that the Government would like to see parents sending their children to the school of their choice. Where that choice may be inhibited or prevented by lack of funds for travel or fees, do the Government intend to help such parents who wish to make a choice but who will need extra money to fulfil it?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the principle of choice is a real one, but as regards giving every single child in the country the finance to attend the school of his parents' choice, within certain constraints parents have the widest possible practicable choice. However, specific rules are set down as regards providing transport for pupils. It is not open to all children to have transport to any school of their parents' choice.

§ Baroness David
My Lords, is it not a fact that under the grant-maintained schools finance regulations 1990 grant-maintained schools are likely to receive 15 to 26 per cent. more in financial terms than if they had remained LEA maintained schools under local financial management?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the noble Baroness is correct in that assumption. The 15 per cent. figure that she mentioned refers to central costs for running education. When a school becomes grant-maintained, it receives a percentage of its bureaucratic costs from the authority. On average that amounts to about 15 per cent. of its direct running costs.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, is the Minister aware that in the area of Tameside in Greater Manchester where I live, only one school has opted out of local authority control? That school in Audenshaw has received over £½ million in direct 311 grant from the Government for the current financial year whereas the rest of the schools in Tameside have received some £1-2 or £1-4 million in total. Does not the Minister consider that that clearly indicates some form of bribery for schools to opt out when they receive such preferential financial treatment?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I do not accept that this matter represents a form of bribery. I know that the grant-maintained sector, which is growing all the time, obtains a proportion of the capital moneys which are available to schools. Many schools which are not grant-maintained will have received large sums of money, such as the sum mentioned by the noble Lord. I cannot comment specifically on the case of Audenshaw except to say that the school is proving a great success and is very popular with the children within that area.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I think that I heard the noble Baroness say that the basis for grant-maintained schools was the exercise of choice by parents. Will the noble Baroness tell noble Lords what view the Government take when that choice is exercised on the basis of racial prejudice?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, it would be precipitate of me to make a statement before the Parliamentary Question is answered later today in another place. However, I can say that the choice of school to which to send their children is one that should be exercised fully by all parents. I am not prepared to comment specifically as to whether or not that choice is made on the basis of race. I believe that the principle of being able to choose the school to which one sends one's children should be upheld so far as is practicable.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I do not like to press the point and I was not aware of a Question on the subject. However, I asked the noble Baroness point blank to take a view on the exercise of racial prejudice. Am I right in thinking from her answer that the Government do not care in the slightest whether or not parents choose to send their children to particular schools on the basis of racial prejudice?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, that is not an interpretation that I accept. If parents do not wish their child to go to a particular school, for whatever reason —and it may be that they do not have to give a reason for choosing a school though I prefer to think of it as a positive rather than a negative choice in favour of a particular school —then I believe that that choice should be upheld. The alternative would be to legislate for parents not to make a choice and to have a category of reasons for doing so.

§ Lord Tordoff
My Lords, the noble Baroness is saying, is she not, that the Government are prepared to sustain such a choice made on racial grounds?

Noble Lords
No!

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I did not say that. It is not a good interpretation of what I said.

Noble Lords
Hear, hear!

§ Baroness David
My Lords, do the Government agree that taking grant-maintained status lifts the "dead hand" of a local education authority from the life of a school—a statement with which the Secretary of State for Education said in the other place he agreed? That seems a very unfortunate thing for him to have said.

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, I believe very sincerely that it frees schools from the dead hand of local authorities. I have spent a good deal of my time in committees dealing with operational matters affecting schools. Schools should not have to wait for a local education authority committee to determine operational matters affecting them. It should be for the school head, staff, governors and parents to make operational decisions.

§ Lord Ritchie of Dundee
My Lords, has the Minister heard, as I have, that in the case of the grant-maintained schools the dead hand of the local authority is replaced by the dead hand of the Department of Education and Science?

§ Baroness Blatch
My Lords, the thrust of the Education Reform Act is to pass operational decision-making to school level. I support that. I believe that there are some very real examples of the effect of the dead hand of the local authority. I prefer to see the local authority working alongside schools, being supportive and advising but not becoming involved in the operation of the schools.