Skip to main content

Oral Answers to Questions

Volume 494: debated on Monday 15 June 2009

Children, Schools and Families

The Secretary of State was asked—

Secondary Schools

1. What recent assessment he has made of educational standards in secondary schools; and if he will make a statement. (279159)

Let me take this opportunity to welcome the new schools Ministers, Mr. Vernon Coaker and Diana Johnson, the new Children’s Minister, Dawn Primarolo, and the new 14 to 19 and apprenticeships Ministers, Mr. Kevin Brennan and Mr. Iain Wright. May I also thank Jim Knight, Bev Hughes and Sarah McCarthy-Fry for all that they did to improve the lives of children and young people in our country, and congratulate them on that? As a result of their efforts, standards in school have risen. In 1997, more than half of all secondary schools were below our benchmark of at least 30 per cent. of pupils getting five good GCSEs. When we launched our national challenge a year ago, that number of schools had fallen to 631. Today it is down to 440 and we are on track to meet our goal of zero by 2011. To help ensure that we do, I can tell the House that I have today approved seven new national challenge trusts to raise school standards in Birmingham, Torbay, Nottingham, Rochdale, Staffordshire, Chester and the Medway. In recent weeks, we have approved four new academies to replace national challenge schools in Bradford, Bournemouth and East Sussex.

I visited a secondary school in my constituency—Tytherington high school—last Friday and it is doing an excellent job. The Secretary of State will know that the well-known independent education foundation, Edge, recently stated in a report that one in four pupils are being failed by their secondary school and that a quarter of parents are also deeply concerned that their child is being let down and believe that the education system needs an overhaul. That is slightly different from the response that the Secretary of State has given. Is there not a problem? Will the right hon. Gentleman give the matter serious consideration, as it is an issue of concern to a lot of parents?

I repeat what I just said. In 1997, more than half of our secondary schools were below our basic benchmark. That number is now down to one in seven—from more than 1,600 to just 440 today. We have further to go, and that is why we are taking forward our national challenge reforms. I would encourage the hon. Gentleman to praise the children in Macclesfield, who have seen a 17.9 percentage point increase in their GCSE results since 1997. That is ahead of the Cheshire average. He should be congratulating pupils in his constituency on their efforts rather than running down the state school system.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that standards have improved quite dramatically in our secondary schools? If he had a priority list, would it include improving the quality of teachers—that is vital—improving transition from primary to secondary and looking again at the national curriculum?

We are always looking at that curriculum. In fact, we have made important reforms to the key stage 3 national curriculum. I am very proud of the fact that, according to Ofsted, we have the best generation of teachers that we have ever had in our country. However, there is more to do to ensure that we get more people to join the teaching profession. The transition from primary to secondary school is crucial to ensuring that children flourish in secondary school, so I was very concerned to see Sir Jim Rose’s comments yesterday that the Opposition’s proposals to shift testing to year 7 would set back that vital transition, to the detriment of children’s learning across our country.

May I also welcome the new ministerial team and, of course, congratulate the Secretary of State on managing to keep his position in the Department? The Government used to say that they would help to improve standards in secondary schools through the Building Schools for the Future programme. Given that the Government are planning a 50 per cent. cut in real capital spending after 2011, will the Secretary of State tell us how much of that programme will survive the Government’s axe?

If I remember the content of a private conversation involving the leader of the Liberal party that was overheard on an aeroplane, I think that the hon. Gentleman’s job was rather more insecure than mine. As for Building Schools for the Future, I think that he has got the parties confused; it is the Opposition who are proposing a £4.5 billion cut in that programme. We are determined to ensure that we keep our school building programme moving forward. I wish the Liberals would support investment in our schools rather than choosing to cut it.

May I first congratulate my right hon. and hon. Friends on their new appointments? My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will be aware that different high schools and secondary schools with identical pupil intakes perform very differently, which in my view is overwhelmingly due to teaching methods and classroom regimes. Has he made specific comparisons and will he ensure that in future schools adopt the best forms of teaching and the best forms of classroom culture?

A very important report from Ofsted published just a few weeks ago considered the 12 top performing secondary schools in the most disadvantaged areas and showed that the vital factors were the quality of their leadership, their commitment to consistency, the quality of their teaching and the high expectations that they had of every child. The fact is that many schools in challenging circumstances are delivering brilliant results. We want to make sure that that happens everywhere, at all times. That is why we are the party that is taking forward the expansion of trusts, academies and specialisms, to make sure that the best leadership is put to work in schools right across the country.

The Secretary of State seems to have dismissed out of hand the innovative proposals from my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove) for ascertaining the quality of children leaving primary school and entering secondary schools. Should he not listen to his friends in the National Union of Teachers, or his friends who are heads of secondary schools up and down this country? They will tell him about the need to understand the capabilities of children when they enter schools—information that standard assessment tests simply cannot provide.

It is very revealing that the NUT executive leadership should be making Conservative party policy. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that that does not happen on the Labour Benches. I have looked very closely at the arguments, and the conclusion that I have reached on the basis of the expert group report is that objective measurement of the performance of primary school pupils is vital if we are to keep raising standards. As for the Opposition’s proposals, they were roundly criticised yesterday by teaching unions and experts alike because they would lead to less accountability and a poorer quality of marking, with parents being denied the information that they need to track the progress of their child. If I were the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove), I would not be bowing to pressure from some unions. I would be doing the right thing by the children of our country—which is what I, unlike him, am determined to do.

On the quality of teaching, the Secretary of State was unable to tell me in a written answer what proportion of lessons in state secondary schools are taken by people who are not qualified teachers. Why is that? Does he not care who is teaching our kids?

I care very much about who is teaching our kids, which is why I am proud that, as I said earlier, we have the best generation of teachers that we have ever had. If the previous schools Minister did not provide a proper answer to my hon. Friend’s question, I will make sure that the new one does so forthwith.

May I join the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws), and indeed the Secretary of State, in wishing well all those Ministers from the Department who have gone on to higher things? May I also commiserate with the right hon. Gentleman on remaining in his current post? I assure him that that is not a commentary on his Department’s Aimhigher programme.

I also congratulate the Minister of State, the hon. Member for Gedling (Mr. Coaker), on being appointed Minister for schools and learners. He is a member of the NUT, and I am delighted that his union endorsed our proposals yesterday, calling them “imaginative” and in the interests of pupils. It is good to have his support, and I look forward to more of it. The Minister is also a member of the Socialist Education Association, which is committed to equality. Like me, he will be disturbed by the fact that barely 2 per cent. of pupils eligible for free school meals sit physics or chemistry GCSE, with under 4 per cent. sitting biology. Such pupils are 25 times less likely to sit any of those subjects than their wealthier peers.

While the numbers of poor children getting competitive qualifications are declining, so are standards. This will be of interest to the Secretary of State: in the latest GCSE biology paper, students are asked if we sweat through our kidneys, liver, lungs or skin. Was not the Royal Society of Chemistry right to suggest that Government changes to the science curriculum had been “a catastrophe”? Is it not true that the poorest pupils are being hit hardest?

The fact is that it is our national challenge programme and our approach to school improvement that will drive up standards in schools across the country, including in the most disadvantaged areas. It is hugely disappointing that the hon. Gentleman refuses to support the school improvement steps that we are taking. He is the shadow schools Minister, and it is a great relief that he is finally willing, for the first time in five months, to ask me a question. The actions that we are taking to drive up standards in all schools, including those in the most disadvantaged communities, are consistently opposed by the Opposition.

Actually, I asked the Secretary of State questions on “The World at One” just 90 minutes ago, and I am surprised that that experience has been wiped clean from his memory, because once again his figures and arguments were utterly discredited. Will he answer the questions that I asked, which were about the science curriculum? The people who work for the right hon. Gentleman point out that, under him, that curriculum has, I am afraid, deteriorated. Ofqual, the exams watchdog, has said that there has been a fall in the quality and rigour of science exams since 2006. Sir Peter Williams, who chaired the Government’s maths reviews, has said:

“I don’t think there’s any doubt whatsoever that absolute A-level standards have fallen”.

Sir Adrian Smith was No. 2 at the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills—remember that?—and he has said that the Government’s plans for science diplomas are wrong, that they simply have not got their GCSEs and A-levels right, and that their whole approach to science is poorly thought through. Until recently, Ralph Tabberer was the man responsible for schools in the Department, but now he has blown the whistle by saying that current education policies fail to emphasise scholarship and high-quality study, and that the Secretary of State is simply going in the wrong direction.

All those experts have worked up close and personal with the Secretary of State. Are they all wrong?

I was very pleased that the hon. Gentleman was willing to go on “The World at One”, and the fact that he has matched that with asking questions in the House of Commons is a real step forward.

I have written to the hon. Gentleman seven times asking for a commitment to match our September guarantee to young people in our country, and seven times there has been no reply to my letter. On the issue of science, the fact is that the number of children doing single, double and triple science exams in state schools has risen year on year in recent years. As he knows, Ofqual had some concerns about the quality of the new science exam, and they are being addressed, but the fact is that across English, maths and many of the single sciences, we are maintaining standards as take-up increases. He is wrong to spend the whole time running down the achievements of pupils in our state schools, who achieved half of the increase in three A-level passes in recent years. The fact is that we are investing and raising standards through policies that are consistently opposed by the Conservative party. The fact that he will not reply to my letters is very revealing indeed.

Macdonald Review

2. When his Department will respond to the Macdonald review of personal, health and social education; and if he will make a statement. (279160)

Sir Alasdair Macdonald’s review was published on 27 April. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State’s statement of the same day welcomed the report, and particularly its recommendation that personal, social and health education should become part of the national curriculum at both primary and secondary level. We are consulting on that and on other recommendations that would require legislation; we are also taking forward action on those recommendations that do not require it.

May I welcome my hon. Friend to the Dispatch Box, and to a well-deserved promotion? May I also congratulate Jim Rose and Alasdair Macdonald on their excellent reports, and the Government on their response to them? Both reports underline the fact that a whole package of early intervention measures must be introduced to help young people to attain in the way that we would like. Will my hon. Friend follow some of the examples of our practice in Nottingham, where we have 11-to-16 life skills lessons starting this September in every secondary school that wants them? Will she please make sure that we call the subject “life skills”, which people on estates in my constituency will understand, rather than PSHE or any other of the obscure acronyms in which we delight in education?

First, may I thank my hon. Friend for his kind remarks and welcome? I pay tribute to his chairmanship of One Nottingham, which has at its heart early intervention strategies to make a real difference to the life chances of children and young people in Nottingham. I think that the Department for Children, Schools and Families will watch very carefully what happens with the life skills programme from September onwards, and I am sure that there will be lots of lessons that we can learn. The issue of PSHE is out for consultation at the moment. One particular question is what the lessons will be called, and I would urge anyone who has a strong view about that to make sure that they take part in that consultation, which runs until the end of July.

I noted the Minister’s answer to the last question, but will schools have to pay from their own budgets for the new training and necessary specialist staff to deliver the new, improved personal, social and health education?

I understand that there is money available—I think that it is £2 million—for the change to be implemented, and resources will of course be made available.

May I add my welcome for the addition of the hon. Lady to the Secretary of State’s burgeoning team, and the addition of the right hon. Member for Bristol, South (Dawn Primarolo), who will be the third Minister for Children that I have faced in recent years? Can the Parliamentary Under-Secretary tell me why, after 12 years of Labour Government and all the changes made to PSHE, we still have the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe, and still have a soaring rate of chlamydia and other sexually transmitted infections? Why do we have an under-age drinking problem that is among the worst in the world, according to the World Health Organisation, and why are the Government falling woefully short of providing the promised number of school nurses to work with clusters of schools as a major means of promoting better children’s health?

Of course the hon. Gentleman will know that there has been a reduction in teenage pregnancies in recent years. The reason why we are consulting on making PSHE statutory in schools is to make sure that there is a step change in that important area, so that young people and children have access to good information about the life skills that they will need. There is also an issue about making sure that resources are devoted to that, but his party’s planned cuts would mean not dealing with some of the real issues with which we are trying to deal.

Sexually Transmitted Infections

3. What recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Health on provision of health services in schools for children with sexually transmitted infections. (279161)

We are working with the Department of Health to improve young people’s access to contraceptive and sexual health advice services, to help them avoid unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections. This includes support to develop services in settings that young people can access more easily, such as schools and further education colleges.

The number of under-16s having contracted sexually transmitted diseases in the past four years, on the Government’s watch, has risen by a mammoth 58 per cent., but I am sure the right hon. Lady will agree that prevention is better than treatment or cure. Will she ensure that in future, parents and responsible families are encouraged to work with good quality relationship education to try to reduce under-age and unprotected intercourse, which has such adverse effects, both physical and emotional, on our young people?

As the hon. Lady knows, screening for STIs and chlamydia in particular, which is being extended all the time, is giving clear indications of the number of young people who may be infected. She is right that we need decent sex and relationship education for young people that enables them, with their parents—but young people in particular—to resist the pressures when they do not want to be sexually active. Regrettably, a quarter to a third of under-16s choose to be sexually active, and we must ensure that services are rapidly available to them to enable them to be safe and to protect their health. I am sure she would welcome properly directed advice being made available to young people, through work with schools, parents and the health service.

May I ask my right hon. Friend to consider a project that is already assessed as valuable, whereby 18 and 19-year-olds are speaking to young people about their sexual health? We can say all we want, but often there are blocks to young people hearing us, whereas a conversation between 18-year-olds and 16-year-olds is much more effective and committed. I ask her to look at such projects to see how sexual health could be better handled by young people speaking to young people.

I agree with the sentiments expressed by my hon. Friend about the importance of such conversations—for instance, very young mothers who enjoy being parents, but are prepared to talk to much younger women about the importance of choosing to be a parent at the right time. Discussions in the school, properly structured and led by qualified personnel, especially health personnel, with young people as advocates can go a great deal further than we have been able to go to date in making sure that young people have the right information to make the right choices for them personally, and to resist the pressures that they often feel.

I welcome the right hon. Lady to her new position. In her discussions with the Secretary of State for Health about the spread of infectious diseases in schools, what discussions has she had or will she have, following the chief medical officer’s prediction last week of a huge surge in the number of cases of swine flu when children go back to school in the autumn? What is her assessment of the likely number of schools that will be required to close, and is she confident that adequate contingency plans are in place to provide education to children whose schools are closed?

The hon. Gentleman raises a very important question about ensuring that the Government at all times take the very best advice from the chief medical officer on the potential for infections in our schools; that we clearly follow the expert advice of the Health Protection Agency; and that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health, in taking part in those discussions in Cobra and other forums, will ensure at every opportunity that our children are protected and that the right steps are taken for staff and young people. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would welcome being kept informed of developments as they progress, because all parts of the House, not just individuals, will share that concern, so I undertake to ensure that he and the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Laws), are kept fully informed.

The increasing prevalence of syphilis, gonorrhoea and chlamydia is not necessarily entirely due to increasing promiscuity or to a lack of safe sex among teenagers; improved diagnostic techniques in the main can also produce apparently higher infection levels in the population. Does my right hon. Friend recall that the only period when the figures headed downwards was many years ago—at the time of the major national publicity campaign on AIDS? Are not the figures now so worrying that that type of national approach and national advertising ought to be considered? We cannot continue on our current way.

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct when he points to the improvements in the diagnostics of STIs. I hear his point about the importance of a national, high-level campaign, but, having looked in partnership with the Minister for public health at all the available research, I must say that it is quite clear that targeted and specific information for young people produces the best results. We will continue to follow that strategy, but I shall reflect on my hon. Friend’s comments and certainly bear them in mind.

Child Care (Summer Holidays)

Ministers receive representations on a wide range of child care issues. Local authorities have a statutory duty to ensure that there is sufficient child care in their area to meet the needs of working parents at all times of the year, including over the summer holidays.

I thank the Minister for his answer. Does he share my concern that, with the rapid fall in the number of child minders over the past five years, there are additional pressures on working parents either to give up their jobs in the summer months or, even, to leave their child home alone? Furthermore, given the Government’s welfare programme, will he assure the House that there is close working between Departments to ensure truly appropriate, affordable and quality child care for all those working parents who need it during the summer months?

I certainly agree with those last comments, which are crucial: we must ensure that adequate, safe and high-quality child care is provided to reassure parents at all times, including during the summer months. I concede to the hon. Lady the point about the number of child minders having fallen over the past two quarterly returns, but I must tell her that the number of places that have been offered has risen slightly, thus providing a greater supply of child care through child minders. On her point about cross-governmental working to ensure that work pays under the welfare system, I must point out to her that the tax credit system has been a huge success and parents can get substantial help towards the cost of registered child care. Working families can claim up to 80 per cent. of their child care costs through the tax credit system, and that equates to £150 a week for one child and up to £240 a week for two or more children.

I welcome my hon. Friend to his new position and hope that he will be as enthusiastic as he was in his previous one. Of course, it is quite right that we support parents who need child care. The issue, however, is not only about having enough child minders, but about the persistent and extra help that we can give to parents through the summer months, when they are under pressure at work. Is my hon. Friend in contact with the education authorities to see whether nurseries can open for extra hours and to ensure that there is extra provision, and will he make sure that, if there is a shortage of funding, he tries to ease that pressure, too?

I thank my hon. Friend for those kind words. I shall miss debating the merits of council houses and other housing matters with him.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. His key point is about child care places and the wider provision of child care in local areas. As I mentioned in an earlier answer, local councils have a statutory duty to assess and identify what is needed. What my hon. Friend has mentioned certainly is needed, as there could be a spike in the summer holidays. I shall consider the issue and am willing to talk to my hon. Friend about it to see what is available in his area.

Child care is also a problem for working mums of rising fives, who in the first term of their schooling sometimes attend part time and have to go home at 12 o’clock. Working mums, who in this economic climate must work to fund the family budget, find it difficult to manage that. Montgomery school in my constituency, for example, takes children only part time for that first term. Will the Minister do more to encourage schools to be flexible and find ways around the problem, so that mums can continue to work?

I certainly share the hon. Gentleman’s concerns. I also declare an interest: my four-year-old son is going through exactly the same stage of life at the moment, and he goes home at midday. As the hon. Gentleman pointed out, the key point is flexibility. Close relationships between child minders, nurseries, schools and parents are absolutely key in respect of providing information to make sure that the circumstances of each individual household are addressed when taking child care places into account.

I welcome the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Wright) to his new position and look forward to debating the issues with him. Hopefully, when he has had time to reflect a little more on his brief, he will find out that although he would like to assert that the child care element of the working tax credit is a success, in fact only 20 per cent. of those eligible actually receive it. I am sure that he is finding out that his brief is very difficult in respect of child care.

As the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke) pointed out, there are now 10,000 fewer registered child minders, and that affects summer child care. Nationwide, however, more child care places are being shut down than new places are opening. Is the new Minister taking a fresh look at why Government policy is squeezing so many trusted child care providers out of the market? Furthermore, will he listen to the findings of the Federation of Small Businesses report, which says that another 200 nurseries could shut before the end of the year?

I thank the hon. Lady for her kind words of welcome to the Dispatch Box, but I disagree fundamentally with what she has said. We have seen a revolution in the flexibility and increased supply of early-years provision. In the five years to 2009, there was a 48 per cent. increase in the numbers benefiting from the child care element of the working tax credit. We are providing real help now to hard-working families. Over the past 12 years, the Government’s real commitment and dedication, matched by unprecedented sums of money, have stood in stark contrast to the proposals from the Conservative party, which would cut tax credits, cut provision and cut chances for hard-working families.

Family Holidays (School Terms)

5. If he will take steps to reduce levels of pupil absence as a result of families taking holidays during school terms. (279163)

Under the Government’s attendance drive, head teachers are taking a tougher line on unnecessary time away from school. Many are refusing permission for term-time holidays in all but the most exceptional circumstances. Furthermore, head teachers are increasingly marking pupils’ absence as unauthorised when term-time holidays are taken without permission. The overall absence rate due to holidays has decreased from 0.7 per cent. in 2006-07 to 0.66 per cent. in 2007-08, a reduction of 0.04 percentage points.

The vast majority of pupils holiday during the summer holidays. However, some parents in Kettering constituency find it difficult to go away then because of their work patterns, family commitments and other difficulties. Are the Government doing anything across the ambit of their responsibility to tackle the premium pricing that holiday tour operators impose on family holidays? If the premium pricing issue were dealt with, far more families would be able to take their holidays during the summer holidays.

It is for local authorities to determine the best holiday pattern in their own areas; no doubt the local authority in Kettering will have heard what the hon. Gentleman has said and will reflect on the various points that people have made, to see whether its holiday pattern is best. However, it is very difficult for the national Government to say what the best holiday pattern is in every area across the country. But let us be clear. We expect our young people to go to school during term time; we do not expect them to miss lessons unnecessarily—and that includes when their parents unnecessarily take them away from school to go on holiday.

Are not some schools guilty of sending mixed messages to parents when, on the one hand, they caution against taking holidays during term time but, on the other, organise ski trips to countries whose language is not being taught at that school? That takes not only children but key members of staff out of education at the same time. Would not such trips be better taken during the holidays?

Again, that is a matter for the individual school. I do not think that any mixed messages are being sent out by schools or, indeed, by the Government. The Government expect young people to attend school, and we do not expect lessons to be missed unnecessarily. Many of the trips that schools take, whether ski trips or other trips, are a fundamental part of the school curriculum. They make a fantastic contribution to the life of the school and broaden the experience of young people, often in ways that they would not otherwise have the opportunity to undertake.

The Minister may well remember from his previous position that it is likely that some of these children are being taken out of school to undergo forced marriages in other countries across the world. Will he take more steps than his predecessor did to look into this problem, which affects thousands of young girls in this country, and to try to ensure that it is stamped out?

The hon. Gentleman raises an extremely serious point with regard to young people who go missing in certain circumstances. I know that my hon. Friend the Minister for Further Education, Skills, Apprenticeships and Consumer Affairs has looked into this issue. None of us can be complacent about forced marriage and the apparent disappearance of some young people from certain communities to be taken back home and entered into forced marriage. I take this issue extremely seriously, and the hon. Gentleman is right to mention it.

School Buildings (Expenditure)

A total of £939 million in school capital funding allocations to schools and to 121 local authorities is being brought forward from 2010-11 to 2009-10 to be spent on school buildings, information and communications technology and other capital items, and to get contracts for local small businesses. It is very disappointing that 27 local authorities chose not to take up that offer, which could have meant a further £183 million in contracts for small businesses in those areas.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply and encourage him to do more of the same. Last week, I visited Scawby primary in my constituency with some local council officers to look at temporary and mobile classrooms that have been there for 30 to 40 years and are literally falling to bits. The council is trying to put together a strategy to replace them, not just at that school but across all its schools, but it finds that the money that is being brought forward can be allocated only to schemes and projects that have been previously approved. If my local council officers are successful in having a replacement strategy, will my right hon. Friend agree to meet a delegation to see how we can secure some capital funding to get rid of these dreadful classrooms once and for all?

The money was partly for individual schools and partly for local authorities, and they need to have a meeting with my hon. Friend to see whether there is more that we can do about that issue. However, there would have been school money going through to deal with it. I am also pleased to say that his area was not one of the 27 areas that did not bring forward capital money—although that is quite surprising, because the vast majority had Conservative councils.

Will the Secretary of State encourage his officials, and education authorities, to concentrate on remodelling and refurbishment ahead of demolition and rebuild in order that more projects that can be undertaken, with value for money?

I will always encourage them to do so. Building Schools for the Future is a great opportunity for school improvement, but it is also an opportunity to ensure that we reconfigure and are more efficient. I know that the hon. Gentleman has concerns about the process that is being followed by his local council—a Conservative council, I believe. I am sure that he will raise those issues with local councillors, and he will do so with my full support for greater efficiency.

The funds spent on new schools can provide futuristic buildings such as Woodland primary school in Heywood, which replaces three local primary schools and a special feature of which is extended community provision with a management structure to suit the local community. Will the Secretary of State encourage other primary schools to support their local communities?

I will do so, and in fact we announced last week more than 100 different projects totalling £200 million, in order to invest in the co-location of services on school sites, which often include health services and wider support for parents. That vision of the 21st century school, with services coming together, is a vital part of our vision for the future of schools. We want to ensure that every parent and every child gets the help that they need, so that children can then learn when they get to school.

What assurance can the Secretary of State give to projects such as Thetford college, in my constituency, that they will not be jeopardised because millions of pounds are being spent on consultants?

If I heard the question right, the hon. Gentleman asked whether spending on consultants will jeopardise investment. It is vital to ensure that we get the financing right and that the configuration works, which is why there is a charge for consultants as part of the Building Schools for the Future programme. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that we should keep that to a minimum to ensure that the money goes directly into schools, but the greater jeopardy comes from the £4.5 billion of cuts that his party’s Front Benchers propose, which would mean that a number of schools in his constituency would not be rebuilt or refurbished. That is the real threat to his constituents.

Sure Start

7. What his most recent assessment is of progress in the establishment of Sure Start children’s centres. (279165)

There were 3,018 Sure Start children’s centres designated by the end of April, offering access to services to almost 2.4 million children under five and their families. We are on track to reach the Government’s target of 3,500 centres by March 2010, one for every community.

I welcome my right hon. Friend to her new position and invite her to visit one of the six excellent children’s centres in my constituency, which provide a wonderful range of activities for children and support for families and mothers, and which have been shown to have improved the development of young children thanks to the work of our excellent former Labour county council.

What assurances can my right hon. Friend give me about the future sustainability of those centres, and that phase 3 will go ahead, in light of the fact that a new administration has been elected that does not have the same commitment to the wonderful children’s centres that have done so much to help our children?

The Derbyshire experience so far shows an excellent record, as my hon. Friend says. Young children are achieving good levels of development, and there has been considerable progress—above the national average—on narrowing the gap between the lowest-achieving and the rest. Funding from the Department is in place not only for the existing centres but to complete the roll-out of the further nine in Derbyshire by March 2010. I have absolutely no reason to believe that that will not happen. The Sure Start funding is ring-fenced, and the Government will watch closely. Should the local authority decide to follow the Opposition’s pleas and cut Sure Start, it can be sure that it will face opposition from both the Government and, I am sure, local parents.

Sure Start centres will each, I believe, have a health visitor based at them in future. That is welcome, but does the Minister accept that the universal health visitor service, which provides absolutely vital assessment and support to families throughout the country, has been undermined by this Labour Government? The Minister—a new, fresh, Minister in a fresh team—can announce today that they will commit themselves to the universal health visitor scheme that this country had, and to which its people wish to return.

I say to the hon. Gentleman that £1 billion is being invested directly into support services in children’s centres, which his party will not match. The national health service is funding Sure Start children’s services and maternity services, which his party will not match. We see in Sure Start children’s centres work by Jobcentre Plus on employment, training and skills for parents, which his party will not match. I can also say to him, having just arrived in the Department after being a Minister in the Department of Health, that discussions between both Departments about expanding and developing the role of health visitors are under way. His party would not answer the plea that he makes to me.

When my right hon. Friend has been to Amber Valley and visited the Sure Start centre there, will she continue to Creswell and Langwith? There, she will see two more Sure Start success stories. We have got not only health visitors but national health service dentists in both places. We want to ensure that that is replicated throughout the country, so let’s keep out the Tories with their cuts.

As my hon. Friend rightly points out, Sure Start children’s centres give children the best start in life in education and health. The Government have invested massively in those services, and all would be put in jeopardy by the policies that the Conservative party espouses. It wishes to make more than £200 million of cuts to Sure Start centres. I am delighted to accept the offer to visit my hon. Friend’s Sure Start centres. When parents understand how damaged their children’s education would be by the Conservative party, they will be clear that Sure Start centres are safe in the Government’s hands.

Topical Questions

I am sure that the whole House will join me in sending condolences to the family and friends of Jacqueline Fleming, who sadly died yesterday in Scotland after contracting the swine flu virus.

Nine schools in England are currently closed. Seventeen schools and two nurseries that were closed have now reopened. I assure parents that, as the Children’s Minister said, we will act at all times on the basis of the best possible medical advice to ensure that children’s safety is put first.

In the Budget, we announced additional investment of £655 million in the next two years so that every 16 and 17-year-old who wants to study or take up a training place can do so this September. I am today announcing the regional breakdown of the extra funding that we are providing to ensure that September guarantee. I would like a consensus between hon. Members of all parties about the need to ensure that all young people have the skills and qualifications that they need. It is therefore a matter of great disappointment to me that a consensus on funding the September guarantee is proving so elusive.

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement on the September guarantee and the £1.5 billion that will come to London in the next year for academic and vocational education for our young people. Does he agree that the investment is particularly important now, at a time of recession? Is it not outrageous that that contrasts starkly with the cuts that the Conservative party would introduce?

I was pleased to confirm the funding for London and all regions today and show that, with the extra funding that we have agreed with the Treasury, we can now make the guarantee. I assumed that we would get a consensus on the matter. I have now written seven times, as has the Schools Minister, to the Conservative spokesman and received no reply. In the interests of efficiency, we may have to call a halt to the letter writing, but I emphasise that the Labour party will guarantee a place in school or college, or an apprenticeship for every young person aged 16 this September and the Conservative party will not. That says everything one needs to know about the difference in priorities between the two parties.

T3. On 19 May 2008, I asked the Secretary of State about the future of the Thomas Lord Audley and Alderman Blaxill schools in my constituency. In good faith, he replied: “Essex county council has explained that its preferred approach is to build on the existing partnership with Stanway school and to pursue a trust.”—[Official Report, 19 May 2008; Vol. 476, c. 3.]Regrettably, Tory-controlled Essex county council had deceived the Department and the Secretary of State. Under those circumstances, will the right hon. Gentleman agree to meet me and other representatives of the Colchester community to discuss the future of the two schools, which the dastardly Tories want to shut? (279186)

A new Minister with responsibility for schools offers the opportunity for a new meeting. I remember the remarks that I made. Those plans are, of course, a matter for local decision making, and it is the Conservative authority that is taking them forward. As we have said before, I wish—and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman does, too—that the whole community could be taken forward in consensus. I support the expansion of academies, but the individual decision is a matter for local decision making. The Minister with responsibility for schools would be delighted to have a meeting to ensure that the hon. Gentleman fully understands all the issues as he takes forward his case with his Conservative opponents in his county.

Is the Secretary of State aware that Blackpool primary schools very much welcome the injection of capital funding, so that Anchorsholme primary school can be rebuilt? On a recent visit to Norbreck primary school, I was shown exciting plans to remodel the 1930s premises in which the infant children are educated. Will he or perhaps one of his new and expanded ministerial team take the time to visit Blackpool and see the exciting developments that will bring our schools into the 21st century and help better educate our young children?

I would be delighted to go to Blackpool to see for myself the investment in primary schools. It is worth pointing out that there is an additional £3 million in 2009-10 and £5.38 million in 2010-11 for the primary capital programme in Blackpool, and I look forward to visiting and seeing it for myself.

T4. The Government’s target to halve teenage pregnancies by 2010 will clearly not be met. Indeed, I have heard mention of dates such as 2039 at the earliest. Notwithstanding that, what action will the Government take to extend and modify the teenage pregnancy strategy beyond 2010 to support all those working on this vital issue up and down the country? That should be done sooner rather than later. (279188)

I am sure that the hon. Lady would agree that, while recognising that it will be difficult to reach the 2010 target, it is important that we should none the less continue to work with local authorities and primary care trusts to deliver the very best services in both health and education. Conversations and discussions have already started with PCTs and local authorities. I myself was speaking at a conference only last week on how we can continue to see a reduction in teenage pregnancies and births as we progress to 2010, and on what we need to do after then to continue building on that good work and the achievements that have been made.

Does my right hon. Friend remember visiting my constituency a few months ago, when we had an interesting discussion about the problems of children entering school at four with not a word of English? At three schools in my constituency, 95 per cent. of the children enter with no English. We had discussions about the possibility of making funding available to help young mothers who have entered as wives to learn English, in order to help them use it at home, so that their children could start school with at least a little English.

The visits that we had were very interesting and important, and I am determined to do what more I can to support my hon. Friend in her campaign. I was in Peterborough just a few weeks ago and saw in a local Sure Start centre how the combination of free nursery care for two-year-olds and Every Child a Talker was making huge strides in helping the speaking of children for whom English was not a first language at the age of two. If we can do more in our Sure Start centres to help those young children and their parents, we should definitely do so. I would be very happy to discuss that further with my hon. Friend.

T5. The Macclesfield and Bollington education improvement partnership, under the excellent chairmanship of headmaster Andy Robinson, comprises four high schools, 28 feeder primary schools, a further education college and a special school, and it has established a strong reputation as a model for collaborative work—so much so that Ofsted has described the work of one of the schools as beyond outstanding. EIPs can do a lot to ensure justice and fairness in the allocation of resources, so would the Secretary of State encourage their work? (279189)

We would certainly be willing to encourage the kind of examples of educational collaboration that the hon. Gentleman refers to. Such collaboration represents an important step forward, and education partnerships demonstrate the ways in which schools can work together to extend their curriculum and to deal with difficult behavioural issues. They provide a whole range of different ways of offering opportunities that simply would not be possible in one school operating on its own. The hon. Gentleman was right to say that secondary and primary schools were co-operating in this way; that kind of collaboration across the age ranges makes a significant difference. It is much better to have collaboration than to set school against school, which is something that his party sometimes advocates.

Sadly, there are now more Conservative councils, and they are relaxed about pupil exclusions. That means that there will be more exclusions and more kids loitering on street corners and estates. The Government’s policy is that the schools in a particular area should share the burden of pupil exclusions, but that is unlikely to happen under these Conservative councils. How will the Government enforce that policy?

My hon. Friend will know that in a recent Ofsted inspection of 18 local authorities, eight were found not to be complying with their legal requirement to make alternative provision for young people who have been permanently excluded from school, six days after that exclusion. We will write to every director of children’s services to remind them of their legal responsibility, and we are putting together an action plan to ensure that the entitlement of young people who have been permanently excluded from school is met, and that the provision is of the right quality. I can also assure my hon. Friend that, in addition to receiving that letter, which I intend to write in the near future, those authorities can expect me to check on the progress that they have made in a few months’ time. It is wrong that pupils who have been permanently excluded from school are not being given the entitlement to education that they deserve, and we are determined to do something about that.

T6. Is the Minister aware of the increased difficulties being faced by smaller charities that deal with children and young people? An example is Visyon, which is based in Congleton but which provides support throughout Cheshire. It provides valuable quality counselling and support to young people, which in many cases prevents their having to be referred to the child and adolescent mental health services. What advice can be given to ensure that these charities can continue to do their proven good work in the future? (279191)

It is vital that charities work together with local authorities to provide the support that children need, especially those with a special educational need. I do not know the details of the charity that the hon. Lady has mentioned, but if she writes to me, I will be happy to take the matter forward.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the education maintenance allowance will continue into the long-term future? It has persuaded many young people from low income families in my constituency to stay on at school post-16, and we all want to hear that there is no question mark over this policy.

The expansion of funding for the September guarantee includes extra funding for EMAs, to ensure that young people can stay on in education. This is a vital part of our September guarantee, and of our extension of opportunity in education. I can assure my hon. Friend that this party will stand by our investment in EMAs and by our September guarantee, but I cannot give her the full reassurance that she wants, because the Leader of the Opposition refuses to endorse or support the continued existence of EMAs, and his shadow education spokesman refuses to back our September guarantee. This tells us everything we need to know about the difference between the two parties and their priorities.

Last week, I asked Ministers in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport why so few secondary schools were able to play cricket using cricket balls, and now I should like to ask the Secretary of State a question about balls. Wasim Khan, who runs the excellent Chance to Shine programme, explained on the “Today” programme that this was because so many secondary schools now no longer have access to their own school playing fields. Does not the Secretary of State think that it is rather sad that schools cannot play competitive cricket using cricket balls because they do not have access to their own school playing fields?

I attended the Twenty20 match at Lords last night and saw England win. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] Before I went there, I presented a prize to schools that had demonstrated how they were using cricket as a means of taking forward the curriculum and providing opportunity. One school in north Yorkshire was using cricket to learn about science. The other case was a consortium of schools from Tower Hamlets, whose young people were going over to Blackheath to play cricket. The competition, sponsored by the English Cricket Board, is an important part of our ambition to ensure both that more young people can play cricket and that England continues to do as well in future Twenty20s as we did last night.