asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will now take steps to ensure that greater use is made of schools' capital equipment out of school hours.

This is primarily a matter for decision by local education authorities and the governors of individual schools. The practice is already on the increase as a result of the encouragement we are giving to the greater use of school premises and facilities by the community I hope that it will continue to expand.

While thanking the right hon. Lady for that Answer, may I ask her to recall that her hon. Friend the Under-Secretary remarked some weeks ago that the nation was not getting full value for its capital expenditure on schools in than schools should be designed with an eye to their use by the community out of school hours? Will she do all she can to further that aim?

Yes, Sir. We are doing all that we possibly can in that direction and the hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that half-a-dozen projects, big and small, have been completed in different parts of the country to provide for the community as well as for the schools. A further 100 are being constructed, planned or considered in England alone.

Would the right hon Lady agree that excellent gymnasia, swimming pools, playing fields and art classrooms could be used in the coming long summer holidays by the surrounding communities?

This, again, is for local authorities to decide; but I agree with my hon. Friend that, given proper supervision, of course, this is a useful thing for local authorities to do.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many local education authorities operate selection procedures; how many different kinds of selection are used; and by what means parents are informed of what is being assessed by these methods.

The next selection tests are likely to be confined to the whole or part of the areas of 114 local education authorities, but this number will continue to decrease as approval plans for secondary reorganisation are implemented. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of a report on "Trends in Allocation Procedures" prepared by the National Foundation for Educational Research, which provides useful information in reply to the latter part of her Question.

I am obliged to my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does not the report indicate that there is a large variety of selection procedures, so that it is not suprising that parents should be very concerned indeed about this matter? Does not this difficulty result from having so many different types of secondary school? Is not the answer to abolish selection tests and have comprehensive education as soon as possible?

Yes, Sir. I agree with my hon. Friend very much indeed. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction among parents in areas where selection tests, or selection of any kind, still exist and the only real solution to the problem is to have a system of comprehensive education which does away with such tests alto-gether.

In view of the efforts which many authorities are making to get rid of the dubious features of the 11-plus, cannot the Government try to take a more balanced view of this problem of selection?

We are taking a very good and balanced view of the matter; that is, we are trying to abolish selection wherever it exists.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what extensions of nursery education he will introduce in the immediate future.

My right hon. Friend recently announced that a further 5,376 full-time nursery places would be included in the second phase of the urban programme, bringing the total this year to well over 10,000 places.

Again, I thank my right hon. Friend for that Answer and assure her that this extension is very welcome. Is she aware that the Transport and General Workers' Union has just come out in favour of a kind of pre-school care? Will she do all she can to help the proposals that it is putting forward?

Yes, Sir. We are doing everything we can about pre-school care. Indeed, my hon. Friend will be pleased to learn that local authorities have made grants to pre-school play groups in various areas as a result of the urban programme.

Can the right hon. Lady say how much money the Government are allocating to this service at the present time?

At the moment, we have the urban programme in progress. We have had the first stage, and the second stage is already announced. The Government are to spend, I think, £20 million to £25 million over the four years, but this includes day nurseries and child care as well. But the essential feature is that, for the first time, where local authorities spend the money the Government are giving a 75 per cent. grant on it.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will seek powers to prevent the spread of propaganda directed to the overthrow of Parliamentary government in secondary schools.

No, Sir. I do not consider that this would be an appropriate matter on which to introduce legislation.

Is the Minister aware that Trotskyist and anarchist forces behind some of the recent university unrest are now turning their attention to the secondary schools? Would he not agree that organised attempts to undermine discipline and the authority of teachers and parents can only disrupt our educational programme, and will he keep the whole question under review?

I have looked very carefully at the evidence available, and feel quite sure that we can leave the schools to handle the matter. It is not illegal to advocate the overthrowing of our Parliamentary institutions, and it is a good thing that that is so: that is why they are so strong.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that it would be very difficult to define the Parliamentary system and Parliamentary government, and that, in any event, it would be improper to restrict the advocacy of the overthrow of certain Parliamentary systems for which the hon. Member for Haltemprice (Mr. Wall) is such an apologist, such as in Rhodesia and South Africa?

All I say is that it would be a considerable infringement of individual liberty to make it illegal to advocate the overthrow of our Parliamentary institutions. That is all I say.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will make a statement on his recent proposals for the use of the fifth or final secondary year when the school leaving age is raised to 16.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what plans he has for allowing a further education option for 15-year-olds when the school leaving age is raised to 16 years.

I am considering the comments which I have recently received from local authority, teacher and other associations concerned, in the context of the preparation of new legislation.

I understand, of course, that this matter requires careful consideration, but will the Secretary of State nevertheless make it clear that if he varies the places in which education in the fifth year can take place, that education will always be under the aegis of the school from which the pupil comes?

This is a point of view, and it is a point of view with which I do not wholly agree. We have to face the fact that over the next decade there must be a great deal of intermingling between secondary schools and places of further education. We cannot afford, either from the point of view of resources or of finance to keep them in watertight compartments, and I hope that everyone concerned will realise this and try to cooperate.

Am I not right in saying that the work on the curriculum that has been done in the last few years has been done on the basis that the pupils will remain in schools? What work has been done on the proposition that they could carry on this extra year in colleges of further education?

I do not think that the Schools Council has done any work on the basis of this proposition which I put out for discussion. I do not suggest for a moment that all pupils should spend the fifth year in a college of further education, but I do suggest that for a great many students who are able to do it now it does make sense.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what administrative action he now proposes that local education authorities should take to eliminate class sizes of over 40.

Any action open to them within the resources available.

When the right hon. Gentleman used the phrase quoted in the question in his speech to the A.E.C., which was widely commented on, he must presumably have had administrative action on their part in mind. Could he not assist the House by at least listing, say, two of the actions?

If the hon. Member will do me the honour of reading the speech that I made at Cardiff, he will see that I listed more than two ways open to local authorities. One obvious way is to create wider catchment areas in towns. Another obvious way is to alter the organisation in the schools. Another obvious way is to redeploy the use of teachers. If the hon. Gentleman has not read the speech, I will be very happy to send him a copy.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science (1) how many representations he has received asking him to postpone moving the railway relics from Clapham to York until an inquiry has been carried out into the possibility of keeping them in London; and what reply he has sent;

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will commission a feasibility study into the setting up of a National Transport Museum in London to house the most important national transport relics.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science (1) if he will postpone the decision to move the Transport Museum to York until an independent study has been carried out into the possibility of keeping the collection in London;

The whole question of the future of the transport relics has been looked at very thoroughly. The Clapham building is unsuitable to continue as a museum. The new museum at York will provide a living railway museum for future generations.

Is it not a fact that the move from Clapham to York will convert and restrict a national transport museum to a provincial railway museum? Is it not thoroughly undesirable to make this regressive move on purely temporary, ad hoc administrative and financial grounds? Would it not be far better to conduct an inquiry into the whole principle of where our national transport museum should be sited?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for showing such interest in this matter, but I would be still more grateful if those taking an interest in the controversy would do us the honour of looking at the evidence that we have collected. Clapham has no powers of internal mobility; no expansion point. It is unsuitable. Other London points are unsuitable. The essence is not cost. The essence is that, on all the evidence we have looked at, we can make a national and expanding museum in York. Perhaps I might add that we just have to be a little careful, at this very time when men are trying to reach the moon, in assuming that to go to Oxford or Cambridge, Edinburgh or York, or any of our great cities outside London, is a journey beyond the capacity of those with specialised interests.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that she has not carried a large section of public opinion with her in this decision; and that if she has this good evidence and these good grounds, people would be very much more convinced if she were to hold an impartial and public inquiry, so that everyone, and not just herself, could partake in the decision making?

I collected as representative a conference as could possibly be held. All the evidence is available to hon. Members. But what shocks me a little is that people give their signatures to letters in The Times and all sorts of things without looking at the evidence that has been collected.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that hon. Members and members of national bodies have studied the evidence made available by the Minister and are completely dissatisfied; and that the people who are dissatisfied are people outside London? Even from York, people have protested against this move—[Interruption.] Is the Minister aware of the growing disquiet about this move being taken without any feasibility study being made by any responsible authority at all? Will she please delay action and permit the Clapham museum to continue?

Questions ought to be brief, even on the Wars of the Roses.

With permission, I shall make available in the Library to hon. Members all the evidence that has been collected. I know that the hon. Lady the Member for Clapham (Mrs. McKay) has a constituency interest, but I know that she knows that her council has said that Clapham is totally unsuitable, and I have already given my reasons for thinking so on all the evidence at our disposal. We should keep in mind that we are living in a very precious island in which London is important, but in which, perhaps, there are also high points of excellence outside London.

I hope that I shall be allowed four supplementary questions—

No.

Is it not an arrogant assumption that nowhere outside London is suitable for any kind of national museum? Is there any better place for a national transport museum than the second city in the country, which is also a great regional transport centre, which was also for many hundreds of years the capital of England, and which today is attracting more visitors to its Castle Museum than the British Museum is attracting to its exhibits?

Would not the right hon. Lady agree that, in spite of what the hon. Member for York (Mr. Alexander W. Lyon) said, there is some concern that the site proposed for this museum in York may be too small? Will she say whether this has been studied? Secondly, can she say whether or not the site at Nine Elms, which has been proposed, was fully studied by her before she came to this decision?

This is a national museum and therefore Greater London Council, quite properly, says that it is not prepared to take financial responsibility for it. I was in York a few days ago. I had difficulty in getting into the present museum as so many people, particularly children, were there. It is static, like Clapham, but I did visit the engine room and I saw the great expanse of land right down to the very decorative riverside, which satisfied me that we can have internal mobility in York. It seemed to me that there is surrounding space in which to make an extremely agreeable museum.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will carry out a feasibility study into the best way of providing a National Transport Record Office in the Metropolis for the records of the transport industries.

The proposal to amalgamate at the new museum in York the record collections covered by Section 144 of the Transport Act, 1968, which are at present housed in London and York, has been looked at very thoroughly. I am sure that, in all the circumstances, this is the right solution.

Will the right hon. Lady agree that all the transport records should be together and that these archives of international importance should not be split up? Second, ought they not to be in close proximity to all the other national records, which are in the Metropolis? Will she look at the matter again?

What the hon. Gentleman suggests is not necessarily so. For instance, Scotland will have its own records, and those have been handed to the Secretary of State for Scotland. London has its own records. York will have the records excluding Scotland's and London's at the present time. One must accept that there are most distinguished libraries and collections outside London with specialised appeal.

Is it not thoroughly undesirable that the decision about the site where these records are kept should, apparently, be taken on the mere fortuitous circumstance that premises happen to be available at a certain site? Would it not be far better to undertake a rational inquiry into the best and most convenient place from the standpoint of the principle of siting these records?

My hon. Friend is misinformed. It was not by accident that there was a Transport Museum at York at well as at Clapham. York was a great railway centre with a great tradition. We found that we had there the geographical setting—all the evidence was examined, and the question has been gone into very thoroughly—and it was clear that this was the best location.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many new primary schools were completed during 1963–64; how many new places were made available; and what are the estimated figures for 1969–70.

In 1963–64 313 and 101, 370 respectively. The estimated figures for 1969–70 are 600 and 215,000.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, compared with the record of hon. Members opposite, this is a very fine record? Will she continue to give priority to primary education and building for primary education, bearing in mind the number of very old schools, particularly in the East Midlands?

I realise that there are still many old schools about which we want to do something in future, but we have had the figures I have given, which show that we are progressing twice as fast today as we were in 1963.

Before the right hon. Lady takes too much credit for this achievement, will she acknowledge that there are over three-quarters of a million more children of primary school age and the improvement factor has therefore declined?

Of course, we realise that there are more children today than there were four years ago, but these figures show that we have gone ahead very much faster than has the number of children.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will seek to make awards to students at long-term residential colleges mandatory upon local education authorities.

This would require legislation for which the Government have no plans at present.

Will my hon. Friend undertake to look most closely at representations being made from students at adult colleges in this regard, because the nation is being deprived of very fine university potential educated material?

We greatly admire the work which these colleges do. In 1966 the then Secretary of State for Education and Science asked authorities to give awards at uniform rates to students going to such colleges. We could not go beyond that without a new Act of Parliament.

Is the hon. Lady aware of cases which have been brought to my notice where the authority has refused an award because of the fear that the student might afterwards qualify to go on to university? Would she not be able to say that it is precisely the purpose of these colleges to provide a second chance and that people should not be deprived of a second chance from which they can particularly benefit?

I completely agree with that. The whole purpose of adult education is to allow people to come back into the education system after perhaps a gap through a lack of opportunity. If the right hon. Gentleman will send such cases to me, I will look into them. We know of only one authority which is taking an unjustifiably restrictive view towards adult education.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what were the numbers of students in teacher training courses in 1964; and what are the latest figures available.

In October, 1964, the number of students following initial teacher training courses in England and Wales was 65,851; the provisional figure for October, 1968, is 110,245.

While appreciating what is being achieved, will my hon. Friend bear in mind the special needs of these non-academic children staying on at school until they are 16? Are there special new provisions for finding the special teachers needed for this job?

A number of in-service courses have been mounted for teachers who are to take children in the raising of the school leaving age year. The Schools Council is working with the support of teachers on a number of other projects.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he is aware of the unsatisfactory facilities for primary education at Stockton-on-Forest; what representations he has received from the local education authority; and what plans he has for remedying the situation.

The North Riding Authority has submitted a proposal to replace the Stockton-on-Forest Church of England controlled school, because of the defects of the existing building. My right hon. Friend has been unable to find a place for it in the building programme because priority had to be given to more urgent projects. I cannot yet say when it will be possible to sanction this replacement.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that 16 years ago these school premises were admitted to be out of date and in the last five years this school's population has increased by 50 per cent. and now has to be housed in improvised accommodation which is 500 yards apart? Will she accept an invitation from me to visit this school during the Summer Recess—if we are to have one?

This is not the first invitation I have had from the right hon. Gentleman. The North Riding Education Authority has been given permission to build four new primary schools under its 1969–70 design list. The local authority put forward a list of 13 and put this school eleventh in the list, so I think the right hon. Gentleman will realise that the education authority gave others higher priority. Incidentally, this school was built in 1857. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that it should have come down long ago.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he now expects to receive the second report of the Public Schools Commission on private day schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will now give the latest date when he expects to receive the second report of the Public Schools Commission.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when Part II of the Report of the Commission on Public Schools will be published; and if he will make a statement.

I hope to receive the Commission's second report towards the end of the year.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that there is some urgency about getting this report quickly because, since he has given a pledge to legislate on comprehensive education next Session, it is important that the future of these day schools should be brought into the general ambit of comprehensive education and not left apart as a tiny privileged sector?

I quite agree that this is a very important problem, because the direct grant schools retain selection in many areas which are otherwise fully comprehensive.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable speculation at the moment in education circles that the Commission is divided on what it is to report and that the report may be delayed until spring? The longer the period of uncertainty the greater the damage to the country's magnificent direct-grant schools.

The hon. Member is better informed than I am. I know nothing about the way the Commission's report is going. All I know is that the chairman has promised the report towards the end of this year. What we cannot allow indefinitely is the use of public funds to retain selection in areas which otherwise are fully comprehensive.

Arising out of the last supplementary answer but one, is it not a fact that a number of direct-grant schools have deliberately altered the age of intake of public free places in order to meet reorganisation schemes? Will the right hon. Gentleman give a firm assurance to the House that he does not intend to interfere with such arrangements which involve these places being taken up at a later age than 11?

I will not give any undertaking about these schools. I realise that some schools are making some moves towards fitting in with the local system. I welcome that very much and hope that more of them will do so.

May we assume that the recommendations in the first report will never be implemented by any Government at any time?

The hon. Member may make no such assumption. The divisive public schools will be dealt with—and dealt with, I hope, before very long.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what studies he is making of the ways in which students on teaching practice in schools can be drawn more fully into the life of the school and help to relieve its manpower problems.

The Department is sponsoring research into teaching practice at Bristol University and further research is planned. There was a conference on the subject at Exeter University in March this year which representatives of the Department and Her Majesty's Inspectorate attended. Many colleges of education are experimenting in new ways of making teaching practice more profitable to students and schools.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that most of the periods of teaching practice spent by students in school are far too short for the students to fit into the life of the school at all, and, further, will she agree that we give our teachers on teaching practice in school far less responsibility in the school than, for instance, student nurses have in hospital? Will my right hon. Friend urge some action in this matter?

The periods may be short, but we must strike a balance here. Although I feel that more could be done about students on school practice, we must ensure that there is no substitution a qualified teacher by a student, because the purpose of the student's being there is to gain help in teaching.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether it is his intention in his forthcoming legislation to seek to relieve local education authorities of their share of the cost of secondary education.

No, Sir.

As the right hon. Gentleman is threatening to over-ride local authorities and their electors on the question of the system of secondary education in their areas, is he not at the same time forfeiting any moral justification for compelling them to contribute financially?

The right hon. Gentleman, who was for a long time a Treasury Minister, knows that the financing of education is not dealt with under the Education Acts. His Question refers to the Education Acts.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether, in the light of his current consultations with interested organisations, he will now make a further statement about the main features of the forthcoming Education Bill.

I am not ready to make a statement until current consultations have been completed. I made clear to the hon. Member on 6th February last that all concerned should first have an opportunity to express views on desirable changes in the law.—[Vol. 777, c. 559–60.]

I welcome the consultations, but will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to publish a White Paper or a Green Paper as soon as we reassemble so that full weight may then be given to the views of the public at large and of hon. Members before the Bill itself appears?

I undertake to publish a White Paper or a Green Paper, but not immediately the House reassembles.

If the Minister intends to introduce a national scheme for comprehensive education in his forthcoming Bill, will he consider the needs of special areas such as Richmond-upon-Thames where there is neither space nor finance to build comprehensive schools and the present secondary schools will need extension?

What is lacking in Richmond-upon-Thames is not space or finance but the will to do it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that there will have to be two Bills, one comparatively short covering his immediate objectives, and later the more comprehensive Bill for which he has been collecting information and views?

The hon. Gentleman will have to await the Queen's Speech.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science (1) in the school building programmes of 1960 to 1964 in England and Wales, what was the value of approvals, starts and work done; how the figures compare with those for the years 1964 to 1968; what was the value of work under construction in 1968; and how it compares with the figure for each of the previous eight years;

As the Answer contains a number of figures, I shall circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Could my right hon. Friend satisfy my curiosity and that of the House by telling us whether, in any of the figures which she will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT, there are any comparative record figures?

The Answer is rather long, but I can tell my hon. Friend that in 1960 the value of school building work under construction was less than £84 million and in 1968 it was £164 million.

Can the right hon. Lady explain why, in spite of all this money being spent on schools, there is such a serious shortage of primary school places in North-East Essex?

I can answer that easily. More ought to have been done in years gone by.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will take steps to compel private schools to install fire escapes, smoke doors and adequate fire precautions generally.

My right hon. Friend already exercises his powers under Section 71 of the Education Act to require all independent schools to have adequate fire precautions and means of escape in the event of fire.

To what extent are the powers exercised? Does my right hon. Friend realise that quite a number of these private schools are housed in accommodation which was never intended to be used as private school premises, and one of these days there could be an awful tragedy, which ought to be prevented now?

If my hon. Friend has any examples, I shall be glad to go into them. Chief fire officers arrange inspections of independent schools on their own initiative, or sometimes at the request of Her Majesty's inspectors who, after visits, may feel that the fire precautions are not adequate.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science, in view of the fact that Whitsun, including Whit Monday next year will be on a different week-end from the Spring Bank Holiday, if he will now send a circular to local education authorities advising them to ensure that school holidays coincide with the Spring Bank Holiday next year and in future years, so that industrial holidays in the spring may coincide with school holidays.

No, Sir. It is for local education authorities and governors and managers of schools to determine school holiday dates to suit local circumstances.

Have not the Government some responsibility in trying to have holidays arranged to coincide with the Spring Bank Holiday? Local authorities, employers in industry and trade unions are finding immense difficulty in getting the school holiday to coincide with the industrial holiday. Could not the right hon. Lady, with the rest of the Government, set a lead?

I understand that there are difficulties in this connection, but, as I say, we could not give directions to local authorities. The hon. Gentleman will be interested to know that the Government are considering whether there should be permanent arrangements for the dates of the spring and summer holidays in England and Wales, and a statement on this will be made later.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the tendency of many local education authorities to give at least a whole week half-term holiday in the summer term is in the interest of both the children and the tourist trade, and will she take steps to encourage other local education authorities to do the same?

My hon. Friend comes from an area to which many holidaymakers go, and his question illustrates how necessary it is that this matter be settled at local level since there are many local considerations to be taken into account.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what progress he has made in his further consultations with teachers' organisations about salary negotiations; and whether he will now make a further statement on future procedure within the Burnham machinery.

I am always ready to see teachers' organisations, separately or together, about salary negotiating machinery and procedures, but I have had no recent consultations.

I appreciate that the ball is not directly in the right hon. Gentleman's court. Will he be ready to do all he can to lubricate the Burnham machinery and get rid of the procedural friction?

I told the teachers' organisations that if they will come to me with agreed proposals about procedure I shall be happy to agree to them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the considerable sense of frustration which has recently been expressed by members of the A.T.T.I.? Would he consider setting up separate negotiating machinery for teachers in technical colleges and colleges of commerce?

As the A.T.T.I. claim has gone to arbitration, the less I say about it at this moment the better.

Shaw asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many qualified married women teachers he estimates are now out of the teaching service.

I cannot make any such estimate.

Has there been any improvement in attracting these qualified teachers back into the profession where their services are so greatly needed?

In the year ending 1st February, 1969, the latest date for which figures are available, nearly 7,000 married women teachers returned to schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many qualified married women teachers he estimates will return to full or part-time service in the year ending 1st February, 1970.

It is too early to assess this. Some interim figures will be available in November. I hope that the figure will continue to be substantial, because I am sure that these teachers have a long-term and valuable place in our schools.

What proposals has the right hon. Gentleman for a recruiting campaign during the coming years? Did not the recruiting campaigns between 1960 and 1967 make a very great deal of difference to the numbers of part-time returners? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his rather muted answers this afternoon will come as a great disappointment to those who know the enormous importance or the contribution made by the part-time married woman returner?

I thought that my answers this afternoon had been anything but muted. The number of women returning is very satisfactory. We do not need a campaign. I have explained in the House before that we now have it established that it is the normal thing for a married woman teacher to return to teaching when she has had her children. I think that this is now firmly established, and the flow of married women back to teaching is satisfactory.

Apart from the seriousness of our not having sufficient information to plan in advance, will not the success of any effort to persuade people to return to teaching depend on there being a proper backing service such as nursery accommodation for the children of the teachers concerned?

I agree, and we are prepared to approve nursery schools where this would facilitate the return of married women teachers.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science to what extent he estimates the employment of more part-time teachers will help to abolish classes of over 40 by September, 1970; and if he will make a statement.

Part-timers have made and are making a valuable contribution to reducing the number of classes over 40. I believe that they will continue to do so.

Does the right hon. Gentleman envisage, if he is to achieve his target, that there must be greater encouragement if more part-time teachers are to be attracted back into the profession?

Yes. I hope that local authorities will continue to recruit them. The latest figure I have is that in the period between October, 1968, and February, 1969, 770 extra full-time equivalents of part-timers returned to teaching.

Will the Secretary of State confirm that there is not a chance of being able to reduce the size of classes to below 40 by 1970 and that in the primary schools the position is getting worse, not better?

I do not agree. If the local authorities follow the lead I gave them in my speech at Cardiff, to which I referred earlier, they can get rid of most at any rate of the classes of 40 or over by September, 1970.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science why the special building allocations for educational priority areas are not being continued beyond 1969–70.

The special two-year programme was a valuable first step in dealing with the problem. But for the future I prefer that as much as can be spared from all the resources for school building be devoted to such areas.

Is the Minister satisfied that more could not be done for educational priority areas?

My right hon. Friend has just pointed out that the school building programme is now about twice as big as it was in the last year of Conservative government. Obviously the educational priority areas are getting a very fair share of that very large building programme.

As the right hon. Gentleman has twice said that about the building programme, will he acknowledge that the last programme that we authorised complete was the 1965–66 programme, and that the improvement element was considerably greater in that programme than in the last programme which the right hon. Gentleman has authorised

In 1964–65 the school building programme was £82 million. In 1971–72 it will be £169·5 million.

What about 1965–66?