Poundswick School (Hansard, 9 December 1985)

§ Mr. Dunn

[pursuant to his reply, 4 December 1985, c. 228]: My right hon. Friend has replied to the right hon. Member today. The text of his letter is as follows:

9 December 1985 Dear Alfred, Further to your recent Question in the Commons and also to your letters of 22 October, 28 October and 1 December enclosing letters and a petition from various constituents and others concerned about the dispute at Poundswick High School, I am now able to give you a substantive reply. I have received representations from six Members, including yourself, and from 26 members of the general public. I have been watching the progress of events with concern, and have considered carefully whether it is a matter in which I should intervene. I have made detailed inquiries of the Manchester Education Authority about the events leading up to the present situation with a view to establishing whether I should use my power of intervention under Section 68 of the Education Act 1944. Under section 68 the holder of my office is not called upon or entitled to substitute his judgement for that of the local education authority. He is only entitled to consider whether the decision made by the LEA was arbitrary or otherwise such that no reasonable LEA could have taken it. In the light of my inquiries and the other information at my disposal I have concluded that there are insufficient grounds for me to be satisfied that the authority's action has been unreasonable in the sense in which that term has—as explained above— to be interpreted in law. I nevertheless remain very concerned about the continuing disruption to the education of all the pupils at Poundswick, and in this connection my Department has now written to Manchester Education Authority. The text of the letter is as follows: I am directed by the Secretary of State to write about the situation at Poundswick High School. The Secretary of State has considered all the information available to him, including that supplied by the Authority at his request on 25 October, with a view to determining whether there is a case for his giving directions under Section 68 of the Education Act 1944. The authority will wish to know that he is not satisfied that the information available to him affords a sufficient basis for him to intervene under that section. He is nevertheless concerned about the prolonged disruption that has arisen to the education of many of the pupils: I am to ask the Authority how it proposes to discharge its duty under the Education Acts to secure the efficient full-time education of the pupils. I am to ask for a reply to this letter no later than 17 December.