asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will now agree to meet London teachers to discuss the London teachers' allowance.

I discussed the London area payment with a deputation from the National Union of Teachers on 7th January. My noble Friend met representatives of the London Head Teachers' Association on 16th January.

In view of the growing deterioration of the education service in Greater London caused by the inadequate London allowance and the recent report from the Family Expenditure Survey showing that the average cost of living for a family in Greater London is at least £7 a week higher than it is in the rest of the country, will the Secretary of State do two things? First, will she urge the Pay Board to speed up its report as a matter of extreme urgency? Secondly, will she emphasise to the board that the new London allowance needs to be at least quadrupled if there is to be a fair deal for London teachers and London children?

My understanding of the position in inner London is that there are more teachers this term than there were last term, although there are, unfortunately, more schools on part time. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has, I believe, conveyed to the Pay Board that we are anxious to receive its report as quickly as possible, but we recognise that it has been asked to do quite a big job, and we hope that it will do it thoroughly.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that there is a feeling of desperation in the Greater London area about the exodus of teachers? It has been pointed out that young teachers wishing to buy a house in which to live, in a place from which they can get to school to teach the children, have to find £4,000–£5,000 more than they would if they were teaching in the provinces, and the Department's contribution to that sum in London weighting is £118? Will the right hon. Lady examine the problem, treating it with the urgency it requires?

I agree that there is a much higher turnover of teachers in London than is usually found elsewhere, but it is not a straight problem of numbers. There has not been an exodus, because there are more teachers than there were last term. I am particularly aware of the housing problem. We have done a survey in the Department into what separate local authorities are prepared to do to help teachers and other employees in their service. The list is quite impressive.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when the inquiry into the education of the handicapped is expected to begin.

After Easter.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that her acceptance of the need for such an inquiry was long overdue? In the circumstances, will she see that the report is issued and acted upon at the earliest possible moment, and give an assurance that the inquiry will not be used as an excuse for not increasing resources for a special education between now and the issue of the committee's report?

I have steadily increased the resources for special education, and I protected them during the recent cuts. I shall go on doing the best I can for the handicapped, who need that type of education. We have just announced the chairman of the special inquiry, Mrs. Mary Warnock, although other members have not yet been appointed. It is a little early to talk about receiving the report and about action upon it, when work has not yet started.

To help the committee of inquiry, will the right hon. Lady liaise with the Secretary of State for Social Services to establish the incidence of various kinds of severe disablement among children? Will it not make it very difficult for the inquiry if it has to guesstimate the numbers of children involved?

I think that such an inquiry will ask for any information it needs to enable it to do its job well, and we shall do our best to find the information.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that, while there is an urgent need to inquire into the education of all disabled children, there are specific categories of disability, such as deafness and blindness, in which the children are particularly discriminated against and find it particularly difficult to catch up? Will she consult the Royal National Institute for the Deaf and the Royal National Institute for the Blind to make sure that their case is carefully considered?

I have already met representatives of the deaf, who put to me the point the hon. Gentleman has put, that those whom they represent, though small in number, should have special consideration, often because their disability is not obvious. I have taken that point, and hope to take it into account in the choice of those whom I appoint to the inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science which school buildings have been deleted from the 1974–75 and 1975–76 building programmes of the Durham County Council in South-West Durham as a result of the Government's economy measures.

One project in the 1974–75 programme, the replacement of All Saints Church of England Primary School at Shildon.

That reply will be received with great regret. As Ministers yesterday put so much stress on the cuts not being financial but being to save fuel and energy, will the Secretary of State consult the building industry and ascertain that building uses very little energy compared with manufacturing? If building is planned over the long days, and if maximum effort is put in, there need be far fewer cuts than the Government have made. Will the Minister consider that point?

I cannot accept that the building of schools and the construction of the materials which go into them use very little energy.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many representations she has received from local authorities protesting about the Chancellor of the Exchequer's cuts in expenditure and their effect on new school building; what reply she has given; and if she will make a statement.

I have received no such representations.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that Wales has hundreds of schools which are over a century old and which badly need replacing? Does she agree that deprivation at an early age cannot be rectified later? Does she not further agree that it is not right that children in Newport or elsewhere should pay for the failures of this Government?

Of course there are a number of old schools which still need replacing, as there were during the previous Government and the Government before that. We know that there will continue to be old buildings in education and other areas of the public service for some time. That is why I made this a top priority during the earlier part of my time as Minister. I very much regret that I have had to suspend the programme for the time being.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that some local authorities are ignoring the recommendations of her circular seeking to maintain the nursery school building programme? Is she aware that the Hampshire Education Committee has now decided to eliminate the whole of its 1974–75 nursery school building programme, involving 24 projects which she had already approved? What does the right hon. Lady intend doing about it?

I hope that local authorities will not ignore this. If, however, a local authority does not take up its nursery programme allocation, that allocation is offered elsewhere. That is the usual rule for school building allocations for which there is a discretion. We shall find that the programme is taken up. I realise that that may not be much consolation to the hon. Member in Hampshire but it may well be some consolation to other authorities anxious to do more than their allocation permits.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will introduce legislation on public lending rights to provide authors with additional remuneration related to the library use of their books and ensure that the cost does not fall on borrowers or on local government funds.

As I said in the reply I gave to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Louth (Mr. Jeffrey Archer on 18th January—[Vol. 867, c. 181.]—my right hon. Friend and I are impressed by the arguments for seeking to recompense authors for the use of their works through public libraries, but there are difficult practical problems which we are studying urgently. The Government have no intention of financing any possible scheme by a direct charge on library borrowers.

I am grateful to the Minister for the latter point. In his consideration, will he bear in mind the necessity to meet the cost from central Government funds and the desirability that payments should be made on a rate per loan basis, and should be payable to all living authors?

I shall bear both those points in mind. The main practical problem I must face is to devise a scheme which will be simple to operate and will not consume in administration most of the resources which might be made available, at a time of severe economic crisis.

Will the hon. Gentleman ensure that he is not seduced by the arguments of the Society of Authors, which is arguing for what is in fact a purchase right and which has totally abandoned the real intention of a public lending right?

I must pay full account to the views of the society. I shall also pay attention to the views of the Writers Action Group. I hope that I shall be seduced by neither.

Why has my hon. Friend necessarily ruled out the suggestion that borrowers should pay something indirectly towards the authors whose books they borrow?

To go from museum charges to library charges would be to go out of the frying pan into the fire.

Has the Minister yet met the representatives of the Society of Authors and the Writers Action Group, both of which have strong claims to put forward and feel very keenly about them? Has he tried to get them to agree on a workable scheme, and if so, with what result?

I have met them, and have had long conversations with both. I have'tried to get them together to agree. I have not yet succeeded, but I live in hope.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what study has been made by her Department on the special problems affecting sixth form ("junior") colleges in local reorganisation schemes in England and Wales.

My Department and Her Majesty's inspectors are keeping under review the development of sixth form colleges in England.

As they are still very new animals, having been going for a year or two in most areas, will my hon. Friend undertake to consider the possibility of a formal study? There are many problems relating to these institutions, not least questions of curricula, preparation for university, their examination successes, and so on.

There are now 31 sixth form colleges, and a further 37 have been approved. My Department and I will follow closely the success or otherwise of the colleges. If a special inquiry should seem to be necessary, we would set one up, but I believe that for the moment we have adequate means of looking at the matter.

As a member of the new Staffordshire County Education Committee and Chairman of the Stoke Education Committee, which built the first sixth form college in this country, may I ask the Minister to ask his right hon. Friend to defer a decision on the comprehensive school arrangements for Staffordshire county until the new district of Newcastle-under-Lyme and Kidsgrove has had a full opportunity to give its thoughts on the proposals being put forward for comprehensive education?

I shall bear that point in mind and write to the hon. Gentleman about it.

How many of the secondary colleges to which the hon. Gentleman referred are open-access colleges?

I do not have that figure with me, but I shall write to the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement on school transport, in view of her departmental inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what reactions she has received from local authorities on the report of the working party on school transport; when she expects to be able to say what she will be recommending; and if she will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when she expects to be able to announce her policy in respect of legislation concerning school transport.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she can yet announce plans for altering the rules and regulations concerning school transport, following the recent publication on school transport from her department.

As I told my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. John E. B. Hill) on 18th December.—[Vol. 866, c. 289]—I shall be consulting the local authority associations about the working party's report. When I have received and considered its views I will make a statement.

Did not the inquiry consult the local authorities in the first place? Am I right in assuming that, because it was a departmental report and, therefore, all the information is within the Department, there will not be much delay in coming to a decision? Does my right hon. Friend recognise that that is important because of the anxiety in rural areas, where people are worried about school transport?

That is not quite right. The fact that some people who are employed by us on a working party happen to be from local education authorities does not mean that the local authorities are bound in any way by what came out in the report. I shall be a little surprised if the proposals in the report meet with universal agreement, because they are so far-reaching.

Does the Secretary of State accept that the situation is becoming more urgent almost daily, and that many people in rural areas in my constituency are now paying several pounds a week to send their children to school? That is an intolerable burden on family incomes. Does the right hon. Lady agree that quick action is necessary?

The proposals in the report mean that some people may well pay less for their children to go to school and that some may well pay a good deal more if they avail themselves of public transport. We shall have to have widespread consultation before arriving at a decision about proposals to lay before the House.

As secondary school reorganisation has a bearing on the report, will my right hon. Friend agree to shorten the three-mile limit as an interim measure before we finally decide what to do?

I should prefer not to make any legislative changes of that kind. As my hon. Friend knows, if a local education authority wishes to provide free transport within the three-mile limit it has full discretion to do so. For the time being it would be better to leave that matter to the judgment of local authorities.

Will the right hon. Lady accept that my constituents in Old Goole, where some children were killed on their way to school, regard this subject as extremely urgent? It is now nearly two years since the working party was established. My constituents want new legislation now, without any increase in their financial burden.

I have been very much aware of that case. It was one of the safety cases rather than one of the distance cases. I hope that we shall commence consultation by the end of next week or the week after. That will be consultation on a completely open basis. We shall not have any specific proposals in mind. We shall wish to know what the local authorities think.

Does my right hon. Friend recall that many children in my constituency have to walk along busy main roads and that they are extremely worried about the problem? Will she consider Chapter 5, paragraph 37 of the report, which deals with the relationship between the walking distance and the safety factor?

I shall look at that paragraph. I think that there is widespread agreement that people would like something to be done, but there is not a great deal of agreement about precisely what they would like to be done. That is why we have to undertake consultation.

Will the right hon. Lady bear in mind school transport implications in terms of the cost and hardship which is caused by the closure of primary schools and some parts of secondary reorganisation which involve long distances from home to school?

Yes. Both those factors are taken into account before we reach decisions on the closure or keeping open of village primary schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the number of schools in the Greater London Council area at which part-time schooling is taking place.

Out of nearly 3,000 schools, I am told by the local education authorities that, at about 22nd January, 122 were offering fewer than their normal school hours.

I note the Minister's deplorable reply. Is he aware that those figures do not give a clear indication of what is taking place? In my constituency several hundred children are now on part-time education. That is something which has been unheard of for many years. It is a direct result of the Minister's policy towards London education. Will the hon. Gentleman or his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State have the courage to come into my constituency to meet the local parents and to explain to them why their children are on part-time education? They will not accept it for much longer.

I urge hon. Members from London constituencies to back the Inner London Education Authority and its education officer in not supporting industrial action by the teachers.

Will the Minister state to what extent part-time education is taking place because of the shortage of teachers and the shortage of schools, and to what extent the announced cuts will assist or exacerbate the present situation?

The problem, as I have just said, is that some of the teachers' unions have decided to take industrial action to support their claim for a larger London allowance. Nobody denies that there are serious problems affecting teachers in London. I must reiterate that we do not believe that industrial action is the right way to proceed. The December cuts have not altered the situation.

Does the Minister agree that his references to strike action by one side or another is a red herring? Is he aware that school closures, or partial closures, were taking place before there was any talk of strike action? Will he bear in mind that it has now reached the stage when handicapped children in my borough are being affected? There is a virtually brand new school under threat of partial closure because of the movement of teachers in and out of the district and the net shortage of teachers for such schools.

I regret the consequences of this action. I must reiterate that it is industrial action. The National Union of Teachers has made that clear.

If part-time working in London is a result of industrial action, why is there only part-time education in counties such as Essex, where there is no industrial action?

The damage being done in London is in support of the NUT claim. I recommend Labour hon. Members to look at the NUT's journal. This is a consequence of industrial action which is designed to lead to an increase in the London allowance.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she can yet say whether she intends to make any changes in the criteria governing the assessment of grants to students, with particular reference to parental income and students who marry.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will now make a further statement on the level of student grants.

My right hon. Friend expects to announce the results of the current review of student grants, including any changes in the parental contribution and the married woman's rate of grant, in the spring.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he ask his right hon. Friend to pay particular attention, before making a statement, to two categories, namely, those students who have been separated from their parents in quite tragic circumstances before starting courses and who are at a disadvantage because their grant would have been based upon their parents' income, and, secondly, women students who are married to low-income non-student husbands who, by any criteria of discrimination, are at a disadvantage compared with their contemporaries?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend will take note of my hon. Friend's point.

The Minister has referred to the publication of a report in the spring. In view of the grave hardship suffered by so many students and of the anomalies which exist regarding students' grants, of which those Members who have colleges in their constituencies are well aware, will he do everything possible to accelerate the publication of the report?

We are anxious to push ahead but it is a complicated matter. We have received two of the three special reports dealing with the facts of the situation and it is now possible to make some headway with our deliberations.

As the age of 18 is now, for all intents and purposes, the age of majority, why should parental income be considered after a student reaches the age of 18?

That point of view is held by many people. I must point out that substantial sums of money are at stake.

Does the Minister agree that it is grossly unfair that parental income for these purposes should be considered net of mortgage repayments but never net of any rent rebates? I understand the administrative convenience of the arrangement, but will the Minister consider the position which, on the surface, is completely illogical?

I am doubtful whether we can meet the hon. Gentleman, but I shall bear his point in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will amend the regulations covering special equipment grants to enable a student following an architecture degree or ARIBA diploma course to be eligible for such a grant.

These students are already eligible for a special equipment grant of up to £20 per annum. The level of this grant is under consideration as part of the general review of student grants.

Does my hon. Friend agree that although certain students are eligible for the equipment grant other students requiring the same equipment for the courses which they are taking are not eligible for it? This is a very unjust situation. Will my hon. Friend give serious consideration to this point in the review which is taking place?

I assure my hon. Friend that this matter is being considered in the current review.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what consideration she has given to the reintroduction of free milk in State primary schools.

Free milk is already provided for all children under the age of 7, all children in special schools, and for any other children of primary school age who are considered by a school medical officer to need it on grounds of health. This safeguards all children who may be at risk nutritionally.

Taking into account last year's massive inflation in food prices and this year's prediction of declining living standards for all of us, do not the Government feel compelled to think again on this issue?

The increase in food prices was very much taken into account when we decided to keep the price of a school meal at 12p instead of increasing it.

Will the right hon. Lady accept that she has a scheme for monitoring the adverse effects of the withdrawal of milk? Is it not true to say that sometimes when it is found that the withdrawal of milk is having an adverse effect it is too late to remedy the situation?

That is why we arranged that school milk should be given to any child who needs it nutritionally. The hon. Gentleman is right in thinking that the Committee on the Medical Aspects of Food Policy does monitor the effects, if any, of the withdrawal of free school milk.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when she expects to be able to publish the results of her survey into truancy.

I hope that the results of our various lines of inquiry will become available about the middle of the year.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that truancy is a massive problem which commences in the primary school?

On the statistical exercise we are carrying out—the forms have just gone out to the schools and should have been filled upon a day last week—we have confined the inquiries to middle and secondary schools because we think the problems are much worse there. We did this because it restricts the amount of statistics with which we have to deal and also because it restricts the number of forms with which head teachers have to deal. I think it is right that we deal with the most urgent aspect of the problem first.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will now increase efforts to improve the teacher-pupil ratio in United Kingdom schools.

My right hon. Friends and I are aiming at a continuing steady improvement in the maintained schools.

The right hon. Lady was quoted last night as urging the invitation into schools of retired teachers and other visitors who presumably would help in some non-teaching capacity. Does she agree that some such alternative, although it might be a short-term help, is no substitute for increasing teacher supply?

I also pointed out yesterday that this year we had had an increase of over 22,000 teachers net, which was more than we expected. We had expected a figure of 20,000. I also pointed out that the increase last year was more than the 18,000 that had been calculated. Extra teachers are coming in considerable numbers. The difficulty to which I referred was of children being sent home early. I thought it far better to get in someone to supervise them.

Will the right hon. Lady answer one of the questions she would not answer yesterday? What is her opinion of local authorities which are responding to her cuts in the education budget by abandoning plans to recruit extra teachers next year?

I thought I had made it quite clear, by repeating the Chancellor's statement, that the cuts were not meant to go to staffing costs at all. As the hon. Gentleman knows, I have no absolute control over local authorities and cannot override their decisions. I hope that they will employ available teachers.

Irrespective of where the local authorities want the cuts to go, is the right hon. Lady aware that we now have a good deal of evidence that they are not going to increase teaching staffs? Is she aware that we have evidence that authorities which would have employed more teachers in September will not do so? What is her advice to them?

I have repeated the Chancellor's statement that cuts should not go to staffing costs. He made that quite clear and I make it clear. I also point out that there have been questions and alarms about either teacher unemployment or teacher shortage for the past four years, including the period of office of the last Labour Government. There are now 80,000 more teachers than there were four years ago.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will instruct Avon County to carry out its obligations under the Local Government Act in relation to library services.

My right hon. Friend has no reason to suppose that Avon County Council is unlikely to carry out its duties as a statutory library authority.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that that is an unsatisfactory reply? Is he aware that Bristol District Council is reported as saying that there has been no true consultation, in the proper sense of the word? Surely this is not the way to build up good will between new authorities. Will he invite Dr. Kersley, the chairman, to his Department to go through with him the provision of Circular 5/73, so that Bristol may have an agency for a library service which it has operated since the 1600s?

I am afraid that I cannot do that because, in accordance with my Department's Circular 5/73, Avon County Council has been asked to submit its observation on the application within 21 days. The matter is now sub judice. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that this application will be carefully considered, and a decision will be announced within the statutory period.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will introduce an element of flexibility into the school leaving regulations so that, where a head teacher is satisfied that a pupil's continued attendance at school is prejudicial to discipline, such pupil shall be allowed to leave school prior to attending the age of 16 years.

No, Sir, but I am consulting teachers and local authority interests to see what support there is for introducing an earlier leaving date for pupils who would reach the upper limit of compulsory schooling at the end of the summer term.

Whatever our views may be about the raising of the school leaving age, is it not clear that this decision has led to the creation of a small but disruptive minority in many of our secondary schools, with the result that teaching resources, already strained to the limit, have to be diverted from those who genuinely want to learn to deal with those groups of troublemakers? While my right hon. Friend's suggestion will go some way to meet this difficulty, would not the suggestion contained in my Question help much more substantially?

I do not think that raising the school leaving age has led to this problem because, on the whole, children do not suddenly become difficult at the age of 15. It may have aggravated it in some schools, and the teachers are no doubt having difficulty in dealing with the problem. My hon. Friend will appreciate that if we say to a young person, "Look, if you are really difficult you can leave school," we might have even more difficult children being sent out into society. Different local education authorities are finding different ways of tackling this problem, and I would rather pursue those ways before considering any alternative.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that the suggestion by her hon. Friend would be a recipe for ill-discipline in the schools and crime outside it? Does she agree that this problem is a social one, not only for those in the fifth forms but throughout secondary schools, which ought to be tackled by giving additional help to the local authorities?

It is a problem. We shall tackle it in time by several different methods, but I believe that the general policy is right.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she can now state what increase she proposes to grant to the Arts Council in 1974–75.

I hope shortly to give the Arts Council the details of its grant, subject to parliamentary approval at the appropriate time.

Does the Minister know whether the Arts Council intends to spend any of next year's grant on any sector of the brass band movement?

As the hon. Member knows, I have great sympathy with the brass band movement as a cultural manifestation, but this is a matter for the Arts Council. It is, I understand, having conversations with the National Youth Brass Band. It has asked for information from the National Youth Brass Band and is waiting for that information in support of its claim. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman can encourage his friends to get a move on.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of making a special grant in view of the Arts Council's intention—which is a departure from its practice heretofore—to foster amateur activities in the arts? Does he realise that it is probable that in future community arts in the regions will depend to an increasing extent on eager and talented amateurs?

I am very sympathetic to that point of view and I shall pass the hon. Gentleman's observations to the Arts Council.

In making his calculations, will the hon. Gentleman take full account of the present enormous inflation? Will he recognise that unless he gives the Arts Council a substantial increase compared with the amount which it has received in previous years it will not be able to support its existing commitments, let alone take on fresh ones?

The current Arts Council grant is £17.388 million—the largest grant, in absolute and real terms, ever paid to the council. I cannot anticipate what the next grant will be, but its amount will be communicated to the council shortly and we shall take into account the rise in prices.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what will be the reduction in the grants by the Department and local education authorities to direct grant schools as a result of the cuts in spending now being imposed on the education service.

Local education authorities do not pay grant to these schools and my right hon. Friend has no plans to reduce the Department's grant.

Can the Minister confirm that local education authorities, together with the Department of Education and Science, pay £17 million from public funds in a total income of £27 million which goes to direct grant schools? There is no suggestion that any sacrifice will be made by these already privileged schools. How does the hon. Gentleman reconcile that with the fact that children already disadvantaged are having to do without necessary resources, equipment, books and even school buildings? How can he justify that state of affairs?

Local authorities are free to take up places at direct grant schools as they desire, but I made it clear in yesterday's debate that proposals to increase grant and fees are scrutinised rigorously and that schools will be expected to make economies comparable with those being required of maintained schools in present circumstances. The level of grant will reflect this.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that £17 million of public money out of £27 million is going to the direct grant schools? How can he justify retaining that figure when cuts are being made in the public sector?

I cannot confirm the exact figure off the cuff, but there is no doubt that substantial sums of public money go to the direct grant schools; that is not in dispute. But the direct grant schools provide very good education for a wide cross-section of the community.