asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she is satisfied with standards of discipline in primary and secondary schools.

I doubt whether any Minister has ever been wholly satisfied about this. I do not underrate the serious difficulties which can be caused in particular schools by a tiny minority, but we do not believe that these problems are widespread. Teachers accept their professional responsibility to maintain order and discipline, and we have held discussions with them and the local education authorities about what can be done to help.

Does the hon. Lady appreciate that most teachers find it more difficult to keep order now than they have ever done, and that in some schools the classroom more nearly resembles a battlefield? What practical steps does her Department intend to take?

I am not sure that I accept that most teachers are finding it more difficult than ever to keep order. I accept that some are. As to practical steps that my Department intends to take, I think, as the hon. Lady must appreciate, the fact that these difficulties, such as they are, arise in the classroom means that they can be solved only in the classroom. Whether that is done initially in the classroom or by the use of special units, or something of that kind, what we are trying to do is to find out which practices local authorities and schools are using that are most helpful and to make sure that knowledge of them is more widespread.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the fact that Sladebrook School, which received a large national Press coverage, is in my constituency of Brent, South? Is she also aware that it is consistent with the traditions of this House that if another Member, in this case the hon. Member for Brent, North (Dr. Boyson), steps into a neighbouring constituency he extends the courtesy of informing the sitting Member before he makes national Press statements?

Further, is my hon. Friend aware that this school is in a typical inner city area, suffering from not only education but housing, employment and many other problems?

To isolate education by sensational publicity of this kind does a great disservice to many devoted teachers, to a headmaster who was appointed only three years ago, and to many parents who are trying to make Sladebrook a school of which to be proud.

I accept that my hon. Friend is right in saying that it is frequently not helpful to parents, teachers or children facing enormous problems of this kind if people seek not to help but merely to use them for their own advantage. Much of what has been said about Sladebrook is both inaccurate and singularly unhelpful.

Is the Minister aware that I did not make any statement on Sladebrook, despite a dossier being in my hand showing that 40 of the 52 children in the second year there did not know how many days there were in the year, and that only one of the 52 children knew how many yards there were in a mile? I did not make any statement until the director of education in Brent herself agreed that seven out of the nine attacks on teachers in the last three months, two of whom required medical attention, were known to the authority.

The chairman of that governing body said that when things went wrong in that school they could be "b … awful". Only at that point did I appeal for a public inquiry, because I believe that if half the things said in that dossier—of which I should gladly send copies to the Secretary of State—are true it is a disgrace for any children to have to go there and for any teachers to have to teach there, at the moment.

I should be glad if the hon. Gentleman would send copies of this anonymous document to the Department. I am aware that there is a strong possibility that less than half of the docu- ment is true. As to the hon. Gentleman's name being associated with it, if it was without his knowledge, I am sorry, but this is a matter for the Press.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what consultations she has had on strengthening the links between industry and higher and further education.

I raise this important subject whenever the opportunity occurs in my frequent meetings with representatives of industry and the education service.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is a very serious problem here? The situation seems to be that the great mass of students seem still to be attracted to courses that have little or no meaning outside the academic walls. Will she accept, with me, that something must be done at school level to improve the present links between schools and industries, and perhaps make more teachers conscious of the nature of industry itself

Yes, Sir. We are already taking a number of actions in this field. I remind my hon. Friend, first, that we have increased the amount that students can receive in the form of sponsorship by industry without their losing mandatory grant. Second, we are discussing the possibility of an industrial scholarship scheme. Third, we are vigorously pursuing the possibility of local links between schools and firms, and, fourth, we are considering the possibility of more work experience for teachers in the course of their training and induction work.

Would the right hon. Lady care to make a statement about the progress that has been made in the company teaching experiment as a means of improving the relationship between people involved with students in higher education and in industry? Will she, in particular, give consideration to extending this experiment by increasing the number of companies involved, since the present very limited amount will, I believe, have hardly any impact in improving the relationship between such students and industry?

Yes, Sir. I understand that already there are five pilot schemes which link universities with associated firms, and very shortly another three universities will be announcing their own proposals. This is not a slow development; it is in fact rather rapid, since the whole matter started only a few months ago.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the most important ways by which her Department can help industry is to help train business men in languages that they need in selling our exports abroad? Is it not rather regrettable that her Department seems to have no information on the number of courses available to business men who might wish to acquire a foreign language? Will she investigate this matter with a view to encouraging the training of business men and also obtaining some information on what is already being done?

I thank my hon. Friend for that question. It raises some difficulties, because most of these courses are what are called full-cost courses, which are not run by the Department of Education and Science. I assure him that one of the matters that we are discussing very urgently with the Business Education Council and the Technician Education Council is the possibility of combining foreign languages with studies of engineering and technology, so that the new generation of business men may be better equipped than the present one.

What encouragement is being given to get graduates to go out into the world for, say, three years before going on to post-graduate courses?

One of the matters that is presently being vigorously pursued by the University Grants Committee is a project for four-year undergraduate degree courses combining an area of practical work in industry with academic studies. I understand that there will be further announcements about this shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement on increases in student grants in relation to the effects of the introduction of the child benefit scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement on student grants, in view of the reduction in child tax allowances in 1977–78.

The parental contribution scale announced by my right hon. Friend on 28th March, which will apply from next September, incorporates an adjustment to compensate parents of students for the loss of child tax allowance. In addition, there will be a minimum grant of £80 towards maintenance.

That statement on 28th March and the one by the Chief Secretary on the following day were very welcome, at least in the sense that they were better late than never, but does the Minister not agree that the whole affair has shown up even more clearly the grave injustices of the parental contribution system? Will he take another look at the matter before further stages of the transition to child benefit?

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman welcomed the making of the statements. We are looking at the whole question of parental contributions, but I remind the House that it would cost £120 million to abolish the contribution system at present, and £55 million even taking into account the full extent of the loss of the child tax allowance. Surely, at a time when they are asking for greater restraint in public expenditure, the Opposition are not encouraging me to do that.

Is the Minister aware of the grave difficulties faced by students receiving discretionary grants? What assistance is he prepared to give to such students who live in their family home and do not receive a proper parental contribution, though they receive something in kind? Many of these students are now in grave danger of not finishing their courses.

The discretionary award system, as the name implies, is a discretionary system dependent upon the local authorities, though I very much hope that local authorities will make adjustments to their parental contribution scales similar to those for mandatory awards. With regard to the individual amount that is given by local authorities and the extent of discretionary awards—this arises on another Question—I can tell the hon. Lady that we will be monitoring the position.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she has recently raised with representatives of local education authorities the subject of discretionary awards for students; and whether she will make a statement.

My officials met officers of the local authority associations on 23rd March. The first step is to establish to what extent, if any, local education authorities are cutting back on discretionary awards, and arrangements are being made to monitor the position.

Does my hon. Friend accept that monitoring is one thing and effective action is something entirely different? Is it not necessary to look closely at the question of the range of discretionary awards, bearing in mind the Government's declared priority of advancing the education opportunities of those in the 16 to 19 age group in particular?

I think that my hon. Friend would agree that before one takes action one should know what the position is. That is why we shall be monitoring the position first. I share my hon. Friend's concern about the provision of education for the 16 to 19-year-old group, but I think it would be wrong to speculate what local authorities are doing until we know the exact position.

Does my hon. Friend accept that the discretionary grant system is a complete jungle? Does he also accept that the people who suffer most under discretionary grants are the children of poor parents, the disabled, and mature students seeking to obtain retraining? Would it not be better if he gave top priority to obtaining social justice for these deprived classes by reviewing discretionary grants?

I think that we should monitor the position before any action is taken. In the recent announcement on student grants, we have included a relaxation of the rules relating to previous study or late application, the introduction of age-related dependants' allowances, and improvements in mature student grants. I agree with my hon. Friend that we need to look at the discretionary award system. That is what we are doing, but we want the information first.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she is satisfied with present levels of attainment in modern languages in local authority schools.

Her Majesty's Inspectorate's recent discussion paper, based on a survey of 83 comprehensive schools, indicates some weaknesses in the teaching of modern languages. I hope that its findings and recommendations will encourage local education authorities and others concerned with language teaching to consider how improvements may be effected within the resources currently available.

For a country as dependent on world-wide trade as we are, is not Her Majesty's Inspectorate's report that only one comprehensive pupil out of 10 obtains an O-level pass in any foreign language thoroughly alarming? Is it not a direct consequence of the political imposition of comprehensive education on local authority schools?

The short answer to the hon. Gentleman is "No, it certainly is not". I agree with him that it is a great pity that far more children do not attain adequate standards in a modern language, but perhaps he is not aware that under the previous selective system no pupil in most secondary modem schools had any opportunity to study a modern language, let alone get a qualification in it.

As the younger one starts learning foreign languages the easier it is to get as much comprehension of them as possible, what prospects does my hon. Friend see of pushing the starting of learning languages back into primary schools more generally?

As I am sure my hon. Friend is aware, this was tried on a limited basis a few years ago and there was a considerable amount of dispute about the results of the experiment and the value of it. However, what we intend should follow from the Inspectorate's survey is a thorough study of what is happening in modern languages and a consideration of how modern language courses can better be planned, which will take into account the full range of schooling.

Is the Minister aware that many language teachers think that one of the reasons for the mediocrity of teaching that was brought out in that report from the Inspectorate is that English grammar is no longer taught in certain schools? Consequently, foreign language teachers spend much of their time teaching grammar from the beginning before they can go on to a foreign language. That does not enhance the enjoyment of that language, and it cuts into the time available for teaching it. Does the hon. Lady agree that it would help the teaching of foreign languages if all our schools returned primarily and secondarily to the teaching of at least the basic standards of grammar?

I am interested in the hon. Gentleman's observations. It may be that an inadequate understanding of grammar in all languages is a factor, but there are many factors that affect this problem, such as the lack of enough teachers of languages. Certainly the Inspectorate's report highlighted the lack of proper planning in language studies. It is difficult to single out one factor rather than another.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what further proposals she has for improving the standard of secondary education, in the light of her recent conferences.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she is satisfied with the results of the regional conferences; and if she will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement in the light of the series of regional educational conferences.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is to be the next stage of the great debate on education.

The regional conferences stimulated a great deal of interesting and thoughtful comment. I am now discussing the questions that emerged from them with those organisations whom I met last November and December. Following this, the Government's proposals will be set out in a Green Paper, which will be published during the summer.

Does the Secretary of State agree that, welcome as her conferences are, it is essential that parents, who are most intimately concerned, should have more say at those conferences? Will the right hon. Lady take steps to ensure that parents' views are expressed to her even more vigorously? Furthermore, does it not show that one of the most crucial aspects is that where there is an area in which parents in general are satisfied that a school is a good one, it should not be destroyed merely for the sake of experiment?

The answer to the hon. Gentleman's first point is that this was the first attempt ever made by the Department of Education and Science to involve parents. However, I am sure the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that where there are effectively no organisations representing more than a small minority of parents it is difficult to set up a structure for the representation of parents.

The answer to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's remarks is that we take into account very carefully the objections of any group of parents to a Section 13 notice. The hon. Gentleman will recognise that there may be differences in parental opinion in a certain area, especially, for example, about comprehensive reorganisation.

rose—

I shall follow the usual custom, when several Questions are answered together, of calling first those whose Questions are being answered. Mr. Tom Arnold.

What steps has the Secretary of State managed to take to allay fears that these conferences were largely cosmetic?

I can only say that, regrettably, although we issued an invitation to the Conservative Parliamentary Party we did not have any of its representatives present at the conferences.

That is not true.

Yes, we did. We invited the Chairman of the Parliamentary Education Committee to nominate those who wanted to represent him at the conferences, and nobody came. I know that this was put in hand, so we can dispute it later. I will give the hon. Gentleman a chance to dispute this, but I am saying in all good faith that such an invitation was issued and I am sorry if, perhaps, it went to the wrong quarter. I made it quite clear that the invitation was to the Chairman of the Education Committee of the Conservative Parliamentary Party, not the Shadow spokesman.

I simply say to the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Mr. Arnold) that 1,471 people were present at the conferences. It is vital to point out that invitations were issued, not to those nominated by the DES, with the exception of a small handful of experts, but to those nominated by all the organisations that approached us, including parent organisations, the CBI and the TUC. Therefore, if the conferences were cosmetic it was the decision of the many organisations that we approached to make them so. I do not believe for one moment that the criticism is justified.

Does the right hon. Lady agree that part of her consideration arising out of the regional conferences ought to be whether it is right that the Department of Education should have quite a different rôle from that which it has had hitherto? It is adopting a fairly aggressive posture in putting forward policies of its own, which may be a good thing, but should not this be considered as an important factor in the way that we deal with the education in this country?

I think that the hon. gentleman has a fair point, but the whole purpose of having a Green Paper—which I very much hope there will be an opportunity to debate in the House before it moves forward to becoming definite regulations or, certainly, before there is any change in legislation—is to enable all parties including, primarily, the House, to give their opinions about what the proper rôle of the Department of Education and Science ought to be in future.

May I tell the right hon. Lady that I forgive her for her inaccuracy, because she has been misled by the erroneous statement made by the Under-Secretary during the last Question Time on education? Will she accept that I was pleased to receive from her an invitation to appoint representatives of the Conservative Party to attend the conferences, that I wrote to her and accepted that invitation, that I appointed representatives to attend every conference, and that all of them attended and made a contribution to the proceedings? Therefore, will the right hon. Lady withdraw what she has said?

In view of what the hon. Gentleman said, of course I will. However, having myself chaired two of the conferences, I can say that the Opposition were singularly both invisible and inaudible, because no Member of Parliament spoke at either of them.

May we have this point clear? The invitation was to representatives of the party, and we were represented by councillors, educationists and others who were specifically appointed as members of the Conservative Party. That was the invitation. It was not an invitation to appoint members of the Conservative Parliamentary Party.

In that case, let me say straight away that there has been a perfectly genuine misunderstanding between us. We had assumed that the invitation was to the Conservative Parliamentary Party since many councillors attended in their rôle of local authority representatives. I repeat my regret that there were no Members of Parliament present at the conferences.

Was it not one of the most encouraging features of the great debate that Opposition Front Bench spokesmen were both invisible and inaudible?

Does the Secretary of State agree that one of the good suggestions that emanated from the conferences was that centres of educational excellence should be established where intensive training could be given on Saturdays? If she believes that that is a good suggestion, will she do nothing to destroy the existing excellent centres of educational excellence in my constituency, which are known as grammar and high schools?

The hon. Gentleman is clever enough to know the distinction. The point that was made in the regional conferences about centres for additional tuition on Saturdays was, as I recall, directed particularly towards those who required remedial and additional teaching. As a Department, we have strongly supported the idea of additional periods in which schools might be open for community uses, for homework, and so on. With respect, that is a separate question from the question whether selective education is the best system. I do not believe that it is.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what guidance she has given to local authorities or what statements have been made by her Department on the establishment of sixth form centres as an alternative to schools for pupils aged 11 to 18 years.

I have issued no guidance on the establishment of sixth form centres. I have mentioned in several speeches the need to use our limited resources effectively for 16- to 18-year-old pupils, especially in the light of the future decline in the school population.

But is it not a fact that when local education authorities had a choice between creating sixth form centres and 11 to 18 all-through schools, the latter were set up with the express approval both of the Department and of the Minister's predecessors? Therefore, is not the review, coming out of the blue, typical of the worst aspects of the Department, which sometimes tends to be excessively mechanistic and bureaucratic, creating uncertainty where uncertainty in the education system should not exist?

No, Sir. I am grateful for the opportunity that my hon. Friend has given me to clear up what is obviously a misunderstanding. There has been a discussion between my Department and the local education authorities about the ideal size of a sixth form. That is in no sense a statement of policy. The statement of policy is the one that I made to the National Association of Schoolmasters and to other conferences in the past week, to the effect that as the size of the post-16 age group falls, as it will dramatically by the middle 1980s, thought should be given to what provision can be made to offer a reasonable range of courses, both academic and non-academic, to those studying in the sixth form. I put it to them that there are three possibilities: first, the linking together of existing all-through schools; second, the sixth form college, and third, the tertiary college concept. It is for local education authorities, in consultation with teachers, to decide what suits them best. A great many of the articles that have appeared in the newspapers, including the Evening Standard today, are based upon a totally misleading misconception.

Will the Minister make clear that in expressing enthusiasm and support for the sixth form college principle, which in appropriate cases I share, she is not inviting those local authorities which have only just completed major secondary reorganisation to embark upon a further reorganisation within five, eight or even 10 years?

Absolutely. The whole position is bound to be based upon the local pattern of the provision of education. All I am trying to say to education authorities is that if they decide that they do not wish to reorganise further—I quite appreciate why they may not want to—they should now start considering how provision can be made, between groups of schools, to offer minority subjects, which might otherwise disappear from the curriculum, to any child who wants to take them.

May we take it, then, that the Secretary of State is repudiating as false the reports that she is carrying on any sort of vendetta against the traditional sixth form, and that she is prepared to encourage a variety of sixth form provision in which sixth form colleges will have a place but in which the traditional sixth form will have an honoured and guaranteed place as well?

I think that that is broadly fair. The only point that I should make to the hon. Gentleman, which I think he will accept, is that where a school's sixth form is so small that it is unable to mount more than a narrow range of courses, both academic and nonacademic, that sixth form must link with other sixth forms in order to enable minority subjects to be offered. The House will be aware how great is our concern about such subjects as Italian, Russian and Spanish, which may well disappear unless arrangements can be made in local authority areas to enable all boys and girls who want to take those subjects to take them, although they may be offered by a single school.

Although I disagree in no way with my right hon. Friend, is it not possible that the dramatic fall in sixth form population that her Department expects may be much less than is feared, since there is at least a possibility that voluntary staying on at school after the age of 16 may grow remarkably during the 1980s?

I take on board my hon. Friend's point. We are projecting everything that we say on the assumption that about one-third of boys and girls will choose to stay on after 16, as against about one-quarter at present. But my hon. Friend will know that quite a number of youngsters decide to move to further education colleges because they want a more vocational type of training. In this situation, the House must consider how best we can offer a range of courses at sixth form level in all our schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she has given any further advice to the Derbyshire Education Committee on the proposed closure of the Dale Abbey Primary School.

Not since my Department wrote to the authority on 30th March. The hon. Member will have received a copy of that letter.

Will the Minister explain why she approved the closure of Dale Abbey school without first ensuring that the closure would not take place midway through an academic year? Will she further explain why, when she discovered that the local authority intended to close the school with indecent haste this Easter, she did not use her powers to defer the closure?

When a local authority has been given permission to close a school, after careful consideration of all the factors involved, it is always for that authority to decide when the closure should be implemented. Derbyshire had indicated in its initial proposals that it was thinking of closing the school this Easter. It is a matter within the discretion of the authority. Once the decision to allow the authority to close the school has been made, the timing is up to the authority. The hon. Gentleman is mistaken if he thinks that we have power to order the authority to defer the closure once we have given permission for the school to be closed.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, Mr. Speaker, I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what further steps she is taking to assist in replacing nineteenth-century schools in Derbyshire.

My right hon. Friend is anxious to resume, and maintain, a programme for replacing old and unsatisfactory school buildings in Derbyshire, as elsewhere, as soon as the economic circumstances permit.

The Government seem to be finding plenty of money for other things. Should not the great education debate be not so much about the question of what the syllabus ought to be as about how much money we should put into education, into providing better education facilities and replacing some of the out-of-date schools, particularly in Derbyshire, where there are, I believe, more than 200 such schools? Will my hon. Friend follow the example of the Labour group in Derby—which will be fighting like hell to retain control of the county council during the next few weeks—by fighting the Tories on the question of education expenditure and not seeming to agree with them, as has been the case with this Government during the past two years?

I agree with my hon. Friend that we need an increase in education expenditure—there is nothing that Ministers in the Department would like to see more—but I differ from him in not thinking that this makes the great debate irrelevant. It seems to me that as part of arguing for more resources one also argues about where they are most needed.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the problem, at least in Derbyshire, is one not merely of replacing outdated nineteenth-century schools but of providing supplementary accommodation in some cases for nineteenth-century and twentieth-century schools? Will she ask the Derbyshire County Council to provide figures on the amount of overcrowding that now exists in schools, notably in my constituency, where there are primary schools for which supplementary accommodation really should be provided?

I shall write to my hon. Friend about this. As he knows, since resources are scarce they tend to be concentrated in areas where there is a need for roofs over heads. But, of course, Derbyshire, like other counties, has a problem of school provision, and it may be that that is why his constituency is not receiving the priority that he would like.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what proposals her Department is intending to put forward with a view to seeing that the education system takes full account of the needs of British industry.

My right hon. Friend intends to publish a consultative document containing her conclusions and proposals in the light of the regional conferences and other recent consultations about education in the schools. In the field of higher and further education she is in touch with local education authorities, the University Grants Committee, the Council for National Academic Awards and other bodies with a view to ensuring that young people are given the best possible preparation for industrial careers.

Notwithstanding the recent evidence of a partial swing back towards engineering and the applied sciences, at least at university level, is the Minister satisfied that his Department is doing everything necessary at all levels in the education system to ensure that industrialists and employers are getting the quality of young people that they are looking for?

Yes, Sir, we are doing everything possible.

Is the Minister satisfied that British industry is taking advantage of opportunities that exist already in the education system, particularly in the context of new industries and the need for research and development? Will he give particular attention to the possibility of experimentation and research and development in the offshore oil industry as it exists in Scotland leading to a situation in which the country could be a dollar earner when the offshore oil industry moves into mid-ocean?

I think that industry is increasingly aware of using the opportunities of the education system. I agree with the hon. Lady that there needs to be more liaison, both in England and in Scotland, between schools, universities and industry, for the very reason that she has given.

My hon. Friend mentioned further and higher education. Does he agree that one of the greatest needs is for basic manipulative skills in secondary schools? Will his document cover the shortages that exist among teachers in these sectors? Does he agree that it may be possible for some mature entry teachers to teach pupils skills, now in short supply, which are becoming of increasing importance?

My right hon. Friend announced recently the training and retraining provision, particularly for teachers of science, mathematics and crafts, where there is a shortage of teachers.

We are looking at the question of basic skills in schools from the point of view not only of higher and further education but of schools as well, trying to increase liaison between individual firms and individual schools. For example, the Schools Council, in co-operation with the TUC and the CBI, is mounting a project to provide material for schools and colleges dealing with the structure of industry and the complexities of industrial society.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science which local education authorities have now replied to her request under the Education Act 1976 for comprehensive reorganisation plans and which authorities have not.

My right hon. Friend wrote to eight local education authorities on 24th November 1976, a further 26 on 17th January 1977, and a further one—Walsall—on 14th April 1977, requiring them to submit, within six months, proposals for the completion of secondary reorganisation in their areas. No proposals have yet been received from any authority or from the governors of any voluntary school.

Has my hon. Friend received any approaches from any of the authorities involved about the availability of resources for reorganisation, and is she in a position to give the House an assurance that comprehensive reorganisation will not be further delayed in areas where it has been held back for long enough because of a lack of resources?

Some local authorities have commented on the difficulties that they expect to face. However, until we receive full proposals for reorganisation from any of these areas we are not prepared to make any decisions. We wish to see the proposals as a whole. The question of resources—as with other questions—will then be taken into account.

Does the Department have any recognised way of measuring the academic or educational change following reorganisation?

I am not sure what the hon. Gentleman means by that question. If he is asking whether we monitor closely the progress of individual schools, the answer is "No", but local authorities may do so.

Is the hon. Lady aware that one of the consequences of the reorganisation proposals that she has called for is that some good schools have been threatened with closure, particularly in my area of the London Borough of Sutton? Is she satisfied that that should be a consequence of her policy?

No, we are not satisfied, and we have made efforts to see that a number of schools are kept open and that they offer their facilities to a wider range of children than has been able to experience them in the past. We greatly regret the loss of any good school, but some, unfortunately, have preferred to withdraw rather than become part of the State system.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what she estimates will be the actual average increase in grants that the Arts Council will be able to make to its subsidised activities during 1977–78 after taking into account the demands arising from the new enterprises that have recently been launched or are planned to come into operation, such as the National Theatre.

The council's grant for recurrent expenses has been increased from £36 million last year to £41·2 million for 1977–78—an increase of 14·4 per cent.

Far too much.

It is for the council to decide how this increase is distributed among its clients.

We all appreciate that there has been a considerable increase in the Treasury grant to the Arts Council, but is my right hon. Friend aware that a significant part of that goes to new enterprises, such as the National Theatre and the new Bromley theatre? That means that unless compensatory action is taken existing enterprises—musical and dramatic—will suffer a significant cut in their Arts Council subsidy this year and that quality will suffer accordingly. Is that my right hon. Friend's policy, or is she prepared to take action to prevent this serious cut in the artistic standards of the organisations that are helped by the Arts Council? [Interruption.]

I shall ignore the backwoods hoots from some of the Opposition Benches and say straight away that the increase in the grant for the Arts Council compares favourably with that for other aspects of education. However, I do not think that it would be right totally to exclude the arts from any of the constraints and severities of our present financial situation. We give the arts a certain preference, but I do not believe that they can be wholly exempted from as rigid a view of their priorities as the rest of education and science, nor do I think that that would be right.

If I may give a Front Bench hoot in general agreement with what the Secretary of State has said, does she agree also that it is as important for the Arts Council to have adequate notice of what it is to receive as of the amount that it is to receive? As, this year, the council received notice only a few days before the opening of the financial year, will the right hon. Lady set about remedying the situation so that in future the council receives six months' notice at least? Better still, why not go back to the old system of making triennial grants to the council?

As the hon. Gentleman will know, from the parallel of the universities, we are trying to move back to a longer-term approach to the financing of bodies such as the Arts Council, but there were particular difficulties this year. I also add, however, that some new ventures are supported from outside the Arts Council. The point raised by my right hon. Friend about the National Theatre is a good example. The National Theatre is supported, in capital terms, by a direct grant-in-aid from the South Bank Theatre Board and not by the Arts Council.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many local education authority nursery schools provided as a result of the urban programme are to be closed as a result of the cuts in public expenditure.

Local education authorities are not obliged to inform my right hon. Friend of their intention to close maintained nursery schools. My Department knows of only one such closure, and the school concerned was not provided under the urban programme.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, but does she agree that schools and classes made available under the urban programme were provided because of a desperate need in areas of special provision? Will she say how she intends to ensure that the statement in the 1976 public expenditure White Paper, that areas of special need will continue to have provision, is carried out?

We are hoping that that statement will be carried through and that provision will be maintained. Whether it is done through the urban programme or in some other way is another matter. At the moment, I am not aware that nursery schools provided under the urban programme are under threat; nor, I hope, will they be.