§ Mr. Hancockasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what information he has on how closure of initial teacher training courses at Portsmouth polytechnic would affect schools in Portsmouth.
§ Mr. Chris PattenIt is not to be expected that recruits to the teaching force in any one locality must necessarily be drawn from a particular local institution providing initial teacher training. In reaching his provisional decision on the future of initial teacher training at Portsmouth polytechnic, my right hon. Friend had regard to the availability of primary initial teacher training courses elsewhere in Hampshire and West Sussex.
§ Mr. Hancockasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what information he has received from Hampshire local education authority and Portsmouth polytechnic with regard to proposals for increasing places on initial teacher training courses at Portsmouth polytechnic; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Chris PattenBoth Hampshire local education authority and Portsmouth polytechnic submitted proposals in February 1986. My right hon. Friend took account of those proposals, along with all others he received, in reaching his provisional decisions on allocations.
§ Mr. Hancockasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what specific factors caused him not to accept the National Advisory Body's recommendations of July 1985 with regard to the future of initial teacher training courses at Portsmouth polytechnic.
§ Mr. Chris PattenMy right hon. Friend considered that the NAB's advice on intakes to courses of initial teacher training for the period 1986–89, submitted in September 1985, would not realise the full potential that existed for securing a high-quality, cost-effective system of initial teacher training in the primary field. He accepted NAB's revised advice for 1986 intakes only, submitted in November 1985, including the recommendation that Portsmouth polytechnic should receive an allocation on the understanding that those proposals would not pre-empt the further review of 1987–89 intakes. When NAB felt unable to undertake that review in accordance with the timetable set by my right hon. Friend, he asked officials to provide advice.