§ 25. Mr. Patrick Thompsonasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how much interest has been shown by secondary schools concerning the suggestion that they will be able to opt out of local government control.
§ 42. Mrs. Maureen Hicksasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many secondary schools have shown an interest in wanting to opt out of local government control.
629W
§ Mr. DunnA significant number of requests for further information about the grant-maintained schools policy has been received within the Department. It is not possible at present to deduce how many secondary schools might be seriously interested in opting out.
§ 27. Mr. Yeoasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received regarding his consultative document on the national curriculum.
§ 50. Mr. Hayesasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what response he has received to his consultative document on the national curriculum.
§ Mrs. RumboldThe Government's consultative document on the national curriculum was published on 24 July, with a formal closing date for comments of 30 September. So far we have received over 7,000 responses, from national and regional organisations, individual members of the public, and others.
§ 29. Mr. Madelasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what estimates his Department has made as to the number of additional civil servants that will be required to help administer schools that opt for direct funding from his Department; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. DunnNo more than a modest addition to the Department's staffing should be required to administer the grant arrangements for schools which opt out of local authority control. Funding of the former direct grant schools, for example, was administered by a team of eight officials.
§ 31. Mr. Ashdownasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what will be the impact of his proposals on opting out of local education authorities capacity to reorganise education.
§ Mr. DunnGrant-maintained status will not be a refuge for weak or failing schools which LEAs wish to close as part of a sensible strategy for rationalising their provision. Where an application for grant-maintained status coincides with an LEA's proposals involving the applicant school, my right hon. Friend will take the respective merits of both sets of proposals into account before reaching his decision.
§ 38. Ms. Armstrongasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will place in the Library those representations he has received in relation to his consultative proposals to devolve financial management to schools; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. DunnI refer the hon. Member to the answer my right hon. Friend gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Normanton (Mr. O'Brien).
45. Mr. Bruceasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps he will take to ensure that schools that have indicated a wish to opt out of local authority control will not be placed at a disadvantage while the legislation is going through Parliament.
§ 62. Mr. Greg Knightasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will take steps to ensure that those schools which have indicated an interest to opt out of local government control will not be at a disadvantage pending the Education Bill reaching the statute book.
630W
§ Mr. DunnSchools will not be able to apply for grant-maintained status until the legislation has reached the statute book. Any proposals made by local authorities in the meantime in respect of particular schools will be judged by my right hon. Friend on their merits. Local authorities will remain under a duty adequately to maintain all those schools for which they have responsibility.
§ 46. Mr. Win Griffithsasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will place in the Library a copy of those representations he has received in relation to his consultative paper, "Admission of Pupils to Maintained Schools", and if he will make a statement.
§ Mrs. RumboldI refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen).
§ 48. Sir John Biggs-Davisonasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what decisions have been made on the Essex education authority's proposals for the reorganisation of secondary education in Epping Forest.
§ Mr. DunnMy right hon. Friend has approved Essex education authority's proposals for the reorganisation of secondary education in Epping Forest.
§ 53. Mr. Neil Hamiltonasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he now has a definite date for the publication of the Education Bill.
§ 57. Mr. Harrisasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he can now give the publication date of the Education Bill.
§ 63. Mr. Jackasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he expects the new Education Bill to be published.
§ Mrs. RumboldThe Government hope to publish an Education Bill within the next few weeks.
§ 68. Mr. Nelsonasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received on the time allowed for consultation on the five papers on reform of the education system published in July and September of this year.
§ Mrs. RumboldThe Government have received over 14,000 responses to the various consultation documents issued in recent months. Some of these have commented on the time allowed, but my right hon. Friend has made it clear that the process of consultation will continue during the passage of Education Bill and beyond.
§ Mr. Spearingasked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he expects to publish a White Paper on his plans for educational change consequent on receipt of replies to his consultative papers; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mrs. RumboldNo. The responses to our consultation papers will inform the preparation of legislation which we hope to introduce within the next few weeks.