§ 24. Mr. Nellistasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the current teachers' pay dispute.
§ 25. Mr. Dormandasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the teachers' dispute.
27. Mr. John Mark Taylorasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the teachers' dispute.
§ 31. Mr. Powleyasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what expectation he has of an early settlement to the teachers' pay dispute.
§ 34. Mrs. Virginia Bottomleyasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the teachers' dispute.
37. Mr. Jim Callaghanasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the current situation in the teachers' pay dispute.
§ 38. Mr. Litherlandasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the current situation in the teachers' pay dispute.
§ 52. Mr. Rogersasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will make a statement on the teachers' pay dispute.
§ 54. Sir John Farrasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the teachers' pay dispute.
§ 56. Mr. Freudasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the teachers' dispute.
§ 66. Mr. Squireasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the teachers' dispute.
§ 67. Mr. Baldryasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the present teachers' pay dispute.
§ Sir Keith JosephI refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member 115W for Suffolk, South (Mr. Yeo), the hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock), my hon. Friends the Members for Saffron Walden (Mr. Haselhurst) and for Stratford-on-Avon (Mr. Howarth), the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. Randall) and my hon. Friends the Members for Newcastle upon Tyne, Central (Mr. Merchant), for Rugby and Kenilworth (Mr. Pawsey) and for Leicester, South (Mr. Spencer).
§ 45. Dr. Mawhinneyasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will estimate how many teacher-days teaching has been lost nationally in the current teachers' dispute.
§ Sir Keith JosephI refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on 22 November to my hon. Friend the Member for Devon, North (Mr. Speller). I regret that the information available centrally does not enable any reliable estimate to be made.
§ 63. Mr. Flanneryasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a further statement on the teachers' dispute; and if he has any plans to make more Government money available before Christmas as a contribution towards the resolution of the dispute.
§ Sir Keith JosephI refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, South (Mr. Yeo), the hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock), my hon. Friends the Members for Saffron Walden (Mr. Haselhurst) and for Stratford-on-Avon (Mr. Howarth), the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, West (Mr. Randall) and my hon. Friends the Members for Newcastle upon Tyne, Central (Mr. Merchant), for Rugby and Kenilworth (Mr. Pawsey) and for Leicester, South (Mr. Spencer).
The Government remain ready to see very substantial sums of additional money spent on teachers' pay in return for a bargain which would secure progress towards its objectives for better schools. So far, however, the unions have refused to seize the opportunity presented by the conditional investment of an additional £1,250 million over four years.
§ Mr. Madelasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether, in the light of the teachers' pay dispute, he will hold discussions with vice chancellors of universities and directors of polytechnics as to what effect this dispute may have on performance at A-levels in 1986 and on the position of potential students in places of higher education; and if he will make a statement.
§ Sir Keith JosephAlthough the three teacher unions engaged in disruption claim that their action is not directed against pupils sitting public examinations in 1986, there can be no doubt that some pupils' preparation for those examinations has been disrupted. I consider that indefensible. I understand that it is normal practice for universities and polytechnics to take into account in considering admissions, any particular problems reported by head teachers as having affected a pupil's performance in GCE A-level examinations, and that this would apply to reports of industrial action.