Education (Schools) Bill (Hansard, 23 July 1997)

§ The Minister of State, Department for Education and Employment (Baroness Blackstone)
My Lords, I beg to move that the Bill do now pass.
This is an important Bill. It is a Bill that will enable us to fulfil a clear manifesto commitment. We promised that we would reduce class sizes for five, six and seven year-olds. Indeed, that was the first of the Government's key pledges. Through this Bill we are demonstrating that we are committed to raising standards in education without delay.
The Bill represents a re-ordering of priorities. The money we shall save from phasing out the assisted places scheme—which benefits only 40,000 pupils—will be used to give those 480,000 infant children in overcrowded classrooms a much better foundation of learning in their early years of education. Those early years are crucial to the future of the children in this country. It is only right that they are given the best possible start in their school life. Ensuring that pupils of infant age are not in classes of more than 30 is a significant first step on the road to raising standards.
We are also honouring our commitment to those pupils on the assisted places scheme. Primary age pupils will keep their places to age 11, when they can transfer to the maintained sector. Secondary age pupils will hold their places until they complete their education at their current school.
I made clear at Report stage that places in free-standing preparatory schools, offered and accepted in light of the letter from Peter Kilfoyle, will be honoured. Noble Lords were asked to express an opinion as to whether that went far enough. An amendment was passed which places an obligation on the Government to support all assisted pupils at free-standing preparatory schools through to the end of their education at such schools at age 13.
I can confirm that we remain of the opinion that that goes further than is required to fulfil commitments given and that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment will be asking members in the other place to overturn the amendment.
We promised the electorate that we would act quickly—and we are doing so. I make no apology for that. No one can claim there has been a lack of notice. Independent schools and local education authorities have a year to plan for the effects of the phasing out of the assisted places scheme. That in our view, is sufficient time.
1442 We have spent a lot of time debating the principles and mechanics of the assisted places scheme—not just the eight or so hours we have spent during the passage of this short Bill, but on the many occasions previously when debating the regulations and during the passage of the initial legislation.
It would take too much of your Lordships' time for me to thank all those who have taken part individually. So I shall simply place on record my thanks to all of them, without whom we would not have had such interesting debates. But I must single out one or two special contributors. I must express warm gratitude to my noble friend Lord McIntosh of Haringey for his support at the Dispatch Box. I know that the noble Lord, Lord Henley, who is not in his place, appreciates the value of such support and he too has been helped by the noble Lord, Lord Pilkington, and the noble Baroness, Lady Byford. I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Henley, and the other members of his team, for performing their duties as official Opposition, sometimes passionately but, despite that, with good grace.
I should like to make particular mention of the contributions of the noble Lord, Lord Tope, who, unfortunately again, is not in his place. I always look forward to his contributions, even when he probes for commitments and seeks clarification of the Government's position. I can always be confident that he will listen carefully and that, when he receives the assurances that he sought, he recognises them.
Support from the Benches behind me is always welcome and I thank my noble friends Lord Morris, Lord Ponsonby and Lord Peston and the noble Baronesses, Lady David and Lady Lockwood, for their most useful contributions. I look forward to their continued support during the debates on the major Education Bill in the autumn. In preparation for that I urge my noble friends to have a good summer. I commend the Bill to the House.

§ Lord Pilkington of Oxenford
My Lords, I accept that the Bill fulfils a manifesto commitment of the Government. Yet, I remain worried about it. Our extensive debates have shown—I quote my noble friend Lord Skidelsky in this matter—that the money saved will not provide the amount of money needed for the worthy aim of reducing class sizes. Therefore, the Bill does not in fact fulfil what it is intended to do.
Because of that, I am very sad that a great opportunity has been lost for constructive co-operation between the public and private sectors. The schools with assisted places could have added to the policy of the present Government and their predecessor of establishing centres of excellence. They could have paralleled and been part of the centres of excellence that this Government propose to continue. The whole community would have benefited from that co-operation between the private and public sectors, as has been shown in those countries, such as Australia and France, where it occurs.
1443 Therefore, I fear again, as so often in debates on English education, that ideology has prevailed over common sense. At this last stage of the Bill, I only hope that at some time we may see English education escaping the shackles of ideology which have done so much destruction over the past three decades—the last 30 years.
I am sad about a promise having been changed into a discretion. I do not believe that my wife would have been very pleased when I made my vows at the altar if I had said that I was going to exercise discretion in the case of the promises that I made. It seems to me that a promise was made, and I do not regard it as sufficient to be replaced with a discretion, however generous. I accept the noble Baroness's assurance that the discretion will be used generously.
Finally, at the end of these long debates I want to express thanks to the noble Baroness for the patience, kindness and care she has shown in the conduct of the passage of this Bill. I also want to express my thanks to my noble friends on this side who have given me so much thought and to noble Lords on the other side who have given me so much to think about.

§ Baroness Hamwee
My Lords, I am a poor substitute for my noble friend Lord Tope who is very sad that he cannot be here this afternoon. He will be relieved that these proceedings at any rate are uncontentious. He will read the remarks of the noble Baroness in Hansard. He is one of those noble Lords who I can say with confidence will read what he should read. He would want me on his behalf and on behalf of these Benches to thank the Minister for the work, the co-operation and assurances given during the course of the Bill.
I repeat that we on these Benches welcome the Bill. But I should also repeat that we welcome it as a small step towards the better funding of education. We are still not clear what the net financial savings will be. We support the Government's objectives, though the Minister will understand the slight note of scepticism that crept into some of our remarks with regard to identifying the means. Therefore, while we welcome the Bill, we hope that the Minister will recognise that we do so continuing the constructive comments and sometimes constructive criticism made by my noble friend.

Lord Campbell of Croy
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Blackstone—and the noble Lord, Lord Sewel, because half the Bill applied to Scotland—for their courtesy and helpful replies at the various stages through which the Bill passed.
I can now bring the House up to date about the saga of the phantom Scottish White Paper. I have received, since Report stage, the promised letter from the noble Baroness. It confirms that there is no Scottish White Paper to match the English one. Her letter also confirms my surmise at Committee stage that the Scottish equivalent was only a press conference at the Scottish Office taken by a junior Minister on the same day as the English White Paper was published—7th July. I reiterate 1444 my view, respectfully, that that is not a suitable substitute for a public parliamentary paper available to all; namely, a White Paper.
I remind the House of the significance of the White Paper. At Second Reading on 24th June the noble Baroness referred to the publication of a White Paper early in July as a future event very relevant to the Bill, in particular on plans for reducing class sizes. She mentioned it in both her opening and closing speeches. In the closing speech she described it as a wide-ranging document.
The Bill covers England, Scotland and Wales. The noble Baroness said nothing to indicate that the White Paper would be on England only. I, and no doubt others, then awaited with eager anticipation the appearance of this document which had so much bearing on the Bill. Sure enough, a White Paper on education was published on 7th July with a Statement in Parliament at the same time. There was nothing in the White Paper or the Statement to say that it dealt only with schools in England. I deduced that it was on England only and asked in the questions after the Statement whether there was a White Paper for Scotland. The noble Baroness was not able to tell me. She clearly did not know and undertook to write to me. She also, generously, said nice things about the Scottish system of education, with her customary charm.
Of course, the unsatisfactory situation that I am describing is no fault of the noble Baroness or of the noble Lord, Lord Sewel. They have admirably given explanations and replies from their briefs. However, I blame the Government as a whole. A White Paper for Wales dealing with education has been published since 7th July. I also blame the Government as a whole for giving the impression that they have overlooked Scotland; and worse, that Scotland does not matter. That impression provides ammunition for the Scottish National Party, though I am sure that that unfortunate impression was not intentional. It was probably due to carelessness. But it does not help new Labour in its feud with the SNP.
When we consider that the Scottish constitutional White Paper which will come out tomorrow, the devolution debate which will take place next week and the whole referendum procedure are happening largely in an attempt—misguided, in my view—to outflank the SNP, it is unwise to appear to have forgotten about Scotland in specific fields like education. It would not have happened in the time of the late Lord Ross of Marnock. I am glad to see the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, present; he will remember those days.
Lord Ross and I twice reversed roles on the Front Benches in another place as Secretary of State and Shadow Secretary of State. Noble Lords from Scotland in all parts of the House will know that I had a great respect for him. Storms and gales would have whistled down the corridors of Whitehall if he had learnt of a proposal to issue an English White Paper without proper arrangements for, or knowledge of, a Scottish equivalent. Incidentally, in those days a White Paper was white and contained the necessary information; it was not a glossy brochure with colour pictures.
1445 At one stage in Committee, on 10th July, the noble Lord, Lord Peston, suggested that the debate had been hijacked by the Scots and that even that was legitimate. Half the amendments which were grouped for that debate indeed related to the Scottish part of the Bill. Our legitimate Scottish points were about the destruction of the assisted places scheme North of the Border. It is with sadness that I see this Bill proceeding to its final stage.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, can I perhaps say that absolutely no discourtesy was meant for Members of your Lordships' House from Scotland who have a specific interest and concern for Scotland. I am extremely grateful for what the noble Lord, Lord Campbell of Croy, said in relation to the propriety of proceedings in this House. I shall of course pass on his concerns to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland.