asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what information he has about the intentions of local authorities with regard to the maintenance of current youth service provisions in the light of cuts in public expenditure programmes.

No firm information is available, as local authorities are not required to tell the Department of their intentions. While it is not possible simultaneously to restrain public expenditure and generally to maintain or increase the size and quality of the services provided, it is my impression that many authorities are doing their best to maintain their youth service provison in spite of the difficulties.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Opposition Members are deeply concerned about the sagging morale of the youth service and the destruction of overall activity in youth service provision? Does he know, for example, that in Liverpool the local authority has pushed voluntary youth work to the bottom of the urban aid list, and that one London borough has told a voluntary youth body that it will lose all its grant next year? Is the hon. Gentleman surprised, therefore, that young people are totally disillusioned with the Government?

Young people are not the only people who are aware that the Opposition are always asking for reductions in public expenditure in general yet oppose every element of restraint which is planned. Consequently, the Opposition have no credit whatsoever in the country. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to raise with me particulars of the specific cases he mentioned, I shall look into them. There are certain circumstances in which some authorities have found great difficulty in maintaining their youth services. On the other hand, there are others which, despite immense difficulties, have made increases in the service. It is far from true to say that the general morale is as bad as the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Does my hon. Friend accept that when the Opposition weep crocodile tears and shed hypocrisy about cuts in public expenditure on the youth service, we would appreciate it if they would tell us how to have an expanding education service while cutting public expenditure in the way they tell the Government to do, almost every day?

My hon. Friend has put his finger on the point I was trying to make. He has underlined clearly what I said. But I do not think that anything that either of us can say will prevent the Opposition from continuing to make general statements about the desirability of reducing public expenditure yet asking for increases in every single service.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps the Government are taking to improve nursery education.

To enable the provision of nursery education places to be increased, allocations of resources to local education authorities for the current year have been maintained and £8·5 million has been allocated for starts in 1976–77. Her Majesty's inspectors maintain regular contact with the schools and authorities, and my Department supports a programme of research which began in 1974, with the establishment of a nursery education research management committee.

What are the criteria by which the Government judge it right to spend many hundreds of millions of pounds on nationalisation while reducing expenditure on nursery education from £30 million to £9 million next year?

The question of public ownership and nationalisation is not one for my Department, but I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that the Opposition have long attempted to suggest that the Government take into public ownership only those things which are failing the nation and therefore cost money. That is not the view of the Government, who also wish to take into public ownership things that are profitable, and which serve the nation well.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Labour Party came to office on the basis of a manifesto that included the expansion of nursery education? Is she further aware that the sum of money she has reported to the House for next year's expansion of nursery education is less than half that which was spent this year? Does not she think that that reduction of nursery education is against everything for which the Labour Party has campaigned?

I am well aware that the Labour Party came to power advocating an expansion of nursery education. I was one of the people responsible for getting it into the programme. If I thought that we were now going to drop it, I should not wish to remain a member of the Government.

I hope that the hon. Lady will reconsider her resignation. It would be a disaster to lose both the hon. Lady and the nursery programme.

I am delighted that the hon. Gentleman is so concerned about my future and that of the nursery school programme. I can assure him that both are in very good hands.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is about time the hypocrisy of the Opposition in this matter was shown up? The hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. St. John-Stevas) has already said that the present Government have given an allocation of only £9 million, whereas his own Government allocated £30 million. Does my hon. Friend agree that the future of nursery education depends on the willingness of local authorities to take up their allocations? As my hon. Friend has already said, many of the Tory authorities, including my own, at Redbridge, have not done this.

I agree completely with what my hon. Friend has said. He has re-emphasised the nature of the situation in which we are placed.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what consultation he is having with representatives of local education authorities about the provision of school books in the next financial year.

None, Sir. Decisions on school book provision are within the discretion of individual authorities.

Is the Minister aware that at a recent conference of educational publishers and of all the leading teachers' organisations, fears were expressed that, because of inflation and the squeeze of public spending, the provision of books will drop by 25 per cent. in the coming year? Is she also aware that at the same conference it was said that the provision of school books per pupil, in Nigeria, is now larger than that in this country?

I am aware of the concern that has been expressed about the whole question of school books. The hon. Gentleman may be aware that the Bullock Committee recommended the setting up of a working party to examine capitation allowances. This recommendation is currently being considered by my Department.

Is the Minister aware that less than 1 per cent. of the local education authorities' budget is spent on school books? Will she accept that unless adequate resources are made available for improving reading standards during statutory schooling, we shall have to enlarge the adult literacy campaign.

I am afraid I did not quite catch the last part of the question.

Does the Minister agree that unless adequate supplies of books are provided during statutory schooling there will have to be greater financial provision for the adult literacy campaign?

This is perfectly accurate. There is a connection, obviously. But I remind the hon. Gentleman that the Bullock Committee, while drawing attention to the question of school books, their quality and availability, also gave instances in which the question of reading standards was not connected simply with the supply of school books. There are many other factors to be borne in mind.

Does my hon. Friend realise that, whilst her Ministry lays down minimum standards for school buildings and for pupil-teacher ratios, her right hon. Friend has given me an answer showing that the Ministry has no standards whatsoever, or no minimum standards, concerning capitation, or for equipment and materials, which includes books? Is she aware that, even where there is an increase in the real resources spent on education, this can, due to the current economic difficulties, sometimes mean a reduction in these very important materials? Does she not think that it is time the Department had some standards in this respect?

I can only repeat what I said in answer to the first question. This is one of the matters to which the Bullock Committee drew attention, and it is one of the matters that we are examining at the moment. I cannot really go much further than that.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the number of pupils who play truant from school at the latest date for which figures are available.

As I stated in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Wallasey (Mrs. Chalker) on 31st October—[Vol. 898, c. 624–5]—no national information is available subsequent to that which has already been given to the House following the Department's survey of absence in maintained middle and secondary schools on 17th January 1974.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the survey which was carried out showed a massive rate of truancy, that any truancy of this sort is invariably a sign of danger to the young person and to the home concerned, and that it is very important for us to have full knowledge of all the facts, in order to understand how to arrest and deal with truancy? What steps is my hon. Friend proposing to take, in the circumstances, to cope with this problem?

The survey gave a useful overall picture. It is evident that the system of establishing national returns needs to be more elaborate before any conclusions can be drawn from them. The consultative letter on behavioural problems—connected, undoubtedly, with the whole question of truancy—which was sent to interested bodies in May this year, asked for the views of the people concerned. A copy of the consultative letter is in the Library, and we hope to see comments on it before deliberating on what more can be done.

Concerning the survey of 17th January 1974 to which the Minister referred, is the Minister aware that the schools had one month's notice that there would be a survey on that day, that the survey was done by the schools themselves, and that it is known that in certain cases, in order to ensure a high attendance, nobody went to the clinics, and that the schools themselves decided what was meant by truancy?

As I have already said, the survey admittedly had defects. Some may relate to the points mentioned by the hon. Gentleman. We are awaiting responses from interested bodies on this whole question, and it may well be that the suggestion he has put forward will be considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether any progress is being made in reorganising education for those over 16 years of age under one umbrella of adult education.

These students form a large and diverse group. I do not believe that their varied educational needs would be better met within a single organisational structure.

Does the Minister therefore depart from what is in the paper published by the Labour Party a year or two ago? Does it really mean that resources are the problem, and that any reorganisation in the adult sector will be set back until more resources are available?

I agree that we need more resources. We are seeking to make them available—for the 16–19 age group. But my hon. Friend's Question asks whether it should be done under one institutional umbrella. The varied needs of those on non-advanced and those on degree courses do not necessarily imply that they should all be within one institutional framework.

Is the Minister aware that nothing highlights more the hollow-ness of the Government's rhetoric on education than the many pronouncements of the noble Lord the Minister of State? Since the conference that he proposed for the autumn has been postponed to the spring and is now no longer to be on adult education but on the 16–19s, will the right hon. Gentleman confirm when the conference is to be, what it will be about, on what scale, and at what cost?

I do not think that that series of questions arises from this Question.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether, in view of his recent circular to local authorities concerning restraint on educational expenditure, especially in relation to four-year-olds and rising fives, he will reconsider his decision not to permit greater flexibility in statutory schooling for the 15–16 year age group.

I have no plans to reduce educational expenditure by curtailing the period of statutory schooling for secondary pupils.

Given the increasing frustration, resentment and disillusionment, and the possible waste of resources among the 15–16 age group, coupled with the desirability to increase nursery education facilities for the rising-fives, would not it be better to allow greater flexibility of the statutory school leaving age, thus giving local authorities some discretion to concentrate their resources where they think most desirable, and not insisting on their doing so on statutory ages which many people believe to be increasingly unsatisfactory?

I cannot agree with that. In my view, the raising of the school leaving age was one of the few good things done by the previous administration. It would be a retrograde step to revert to arrangements of the kind that the hon. Gentleman suggests. On the other hand, as both my hon. Friends have made clear with regard to nursery education, one of the difficulties is that although, in the rate support grant, we provide for the recurrent costs, local authorities are not spending on education the funds which have been allocated to education. Some Conservative authorities are not taking up their allocations for nursery education, but at the same time they object to the allocations given to other authorities.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the restraint is having a positive effect, especially in my area, where many children who have passed the age of five are not being admitted to schools? Is not this in contradiction of the 1944 Education Act, and will my right hon. Friend say what he intends to do about this situation?

I should prefer not to give a legal ruling off the cuff, in answer to a supplementary question. If my hon. Friend will let me have details, I shall look into the position. However, if the children are of statutory school age, the local authorities concerned have a statutory obligation to provide schooling for them.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many places he estimates that the maintained sector will lose as a result of the withdrawal of the direct grant.

It is too early to know precisely what the effect of the phase-out will be, as the schools concerned are not required to indicate their intentions until the end of the year.

Does not it illustrate a strange sense of priorities on the part of the Government when, irrespective of the numbers involved, the Minister feels obliged to provide, at public expense, for the education of children who would otherwise have gone to direct grant schools, at a time when the Government's nursery school programme appears to be grinding to a halt?

I am deeply moved by the Opposition's great concern about the nursery school programme and their wish now to go back on the raising of the school leaving age, which was introduced by their Leader when she was Secretary of State for Education. I am afraid that it is not possible to give precise figures about the direct grant schools, but the additional cost could amount to £12 million. However, the additional saving, if it went the other way, could be as much as £30 million. Taking a line down the middle, therefore, there might be a saving of about £9 million as a result of the Government's policy for the direct grant schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will give details of the work already carried out by the Assessment of Performance Unit within his Department; and if he will make a statement about its future programme.

The unit has been considering on which areas of pupils' performance its efforts to improve and extend assessment should first be concentrated, and which other areas should also be covered. Its specialist groups concerned with language and science have already had preliminary discussions, and the unit is in touch with work already in progress on testing mathematics. A widely based consultative committee is in the process of formation.

Why has this unit done so little?

It is difficult to answer that question unless the hon. Lady can be a little more expansive about what she has in mind. I have given details of progress so far. There was a delay in the appointment of a chairman, which meant that the consultative committee has not got off the ground as quickly as we had hoped. However, progress is being made. If the hon. Lady tables another Question on the next occasion that we take Questions on Education and Science, she will be provided with further information.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many local education authorities have still not submitted plans for comprehensive reorganisation covering their whole areas.

Seven local education authorities have refused to submit plans for the total elimination of selection for secondary education in their areas and a further 13 have not yet submitted complete responses to Circular 4/74.

Does not that answer reveal that a considerable number of local authorities are determined to obstruct or delay the implementation of comprehensive reorganisation unless my right hon. Friend is prepared to introduce legislation forcing them to do so? Has his attention been drawn to statements by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Kent Education Committee saying that comprehensive reorganisation in parts of that county would not be effective until the 1980s or the 1990s? Has my right hon. Friend's attention also been drawn to the refusal of the education committee even to discuss plans for reorganisation in parts of the county, including my own constituency?

My hon. Friend knows the legal position. I am sure that he will agree that since I was appointed in June the parliamentary timetable has been fully occupied. There has been no opportunity for legislation in the present Session. However, he will know from my consultative document that the need for legislation is very much in my mind.

Are not these education authorities—especially the Kent authority—to be congratulated on giving effect to the Charter of Human Rights, which specifies that parents shall have the right to choose their children's education?

I do not think that that arises in any sense from the original Question and my Answer to it.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether it remains his policy that control of the public sector of education should remain with local authorities.

I have no plans to change the existing basic division of responsibility between the local education authorities and my Department.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the financing and the control of the public sector of education must go together, so that the transfer of financial provision to central Government, as is widely advocated, would effectively mean the end of local education authorities?

I agree about the importance of the financial support for education by central Government being administered by the local education authorities. My hon. Friend knows that the Layfield Committee has been studying all aspects of local government finance, including this one. It will be reporting soon. When that report is available, we shall want to consider carefully whether existing arrangements are satisfactory.

Does not the Press notice of 17th September sent out under the Minister's authority contain a threat to coerce those education authorities which decline to go comprehensive? Does it not also threaten them with restricting their rights under the Education Acts to take up places in independent schools, and does not that mean a major shift—a constitutional change—of power to the Government from local education authorities? Ought not an announcement of that importance to have been made to this House rather than in a Press notice? If government by circular is bad, is not government by Press notice worse?

This was not a matter of a decision being communicated by a Press notice. As I was consulting the local authorities on certain matters, I thought it advisable that other bodies should have the consultation document available to them in the same way that it was available to the hon. Member for Chelmsford (Mr. St. John-Stevas). In my view that was desirable.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he can announce any progress on the completion of the new building for the National Theatre.

I am glad to say that steady progress is being made towards the completion of the new building, with a view to the National Theatre Company opening in it to a paying public next March. The company is already rehearsing in the new building.

I am delighted that my hon. Friend is able to announce a firm date for the opening of the theatre. Can he relieve the widespread anxiety which exists about the future of other theatres, operas and ballet companies supported by the Arts Council, resulting from the particularly severe impact of inflation? Will these bodies be enabled to function effectively in the future without a severe diminution of standards?

The Government are well aware of the difficulties posed for the Arts Council and its beneficiaries by inflation. Discussions are taking place. One problem is that the Arts Council is being asked to carry, on its own grant, not only the consequences of inflation, but a larger share of the total cost of its operations. I expect to meet the Chairman and members of the Arts Council next week.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he expects to receive the Report of the Taylor Committee on School Management.

My right hon. Friend hopes that the committee's task will be completed within the next 18 months or so.

Is the Minister aware that the city of Sheffield, part of which is repre sented by her right hon. Friend, is using the boards of managers and governors to foster a new type of relationship between the schools and the community? A recent survey by the local education authority suggests a certain degree of success already, because the system is creating a new channel of communication between the schools and the community.

That is a most interesting point. I hope that the Taylor Committee will take due notice of that information, which I am sure it will find helpful.

Is the Minister satisfied with the position. If the hon. Gentleman by her Department to those people who wish to be parent governors?

I am perfectly satisfied with the position. If the hon. Gentleman has a specific complaint I shall be happy to consider it.

Does not the situation which has arisen at the William Tyndale Junior School make it essential—[Interruption.] That is a matter for Mr. Speaker, not hon. Members opposite.

That is for an Adjournment debate.

Does not that position make it a matter of great urgency that the committee and, indeed, the Department of Education, should consider whether arrangements should be made for the election or the appointment to governing bodies of an adequate number of parents with children at such schools? If that had been done, the type of situation which occurred at the William Tyndale school would not have arisen.

In my view the hon. Gentleman is prejudging the situation. He has no more knowledge than I whether parents, teachers or any other people were at fault in respect of the William Tyndale school. Until the inquiry has been completed it would be better for us to remain impartial.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what provisions, and at what colleges, exist in Wales for the training of speech therapists; and whether he is satisfied with the situation.

A course is available in Wales at the Llandaff College of Technology. There has been an encouraging increase in training facilities in England, Wales and Scotland since 1972, broadly consistent with the expansion of the service which the Quirk Committee envisaged for the 20-year period from that date.

Is the Minister aware that in a constituency such as mine, which is 87 per cent. Welsh speaking, a large number of children aged 2, 3 and 4 years may be monoglot Welsh, yet the area health authority in my area could not recruit a single applicant who was competent to look after Welsh speaking children in need of speech therapy? Will the Minister consider the possibility of bringing pressure to bear on advancing courses to teach speech therapists, with a particular relevance to the Welsh language?

I am quite certain that the numbers of such people available in all parts of the country are inadequate to the needs. This is a problem, but it takes time for these people to be trained. However, I am advised that not only has the number of people taking the course in Wales increased, but that Welsh speaking students are being recruited. I hope that they will be available to meet the type of situation to which the hon. Gentleman has referred.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many students occupy places in medical schools at the present time, and how many did 10 years ago, respectively.

In 1973–74, the latest year for which figures are available, the number of full-time students in medical schools in Great Britain was 17,299. In 1965–66 there were 14,438.

Does my right hon. Friend consider that the inevitable long terms effect of the decisions to expand medical school provisions, which was taken by the previous Labour Government in the late 1960s, will adequately relieve existing shortages? If not, what further steps are being considered?

We have plans to increase the number of admissions to about 4,000 each year by the end of this decade, as against 3,300 at present. However, the actual assessment of manpower needs is the responsibility of my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Social Services, Scotland and Wales.

Is the Minister taking any steps to ensure that a large proportion of the places available is allocated to women medical students?

There has been an increasing number of women students. Without notice, I am unable to give the exact figures, but certainly there is this welcome tendency. I do not believe that it is for me to lay down any particular proportions.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the increase of approximately 20 per cent. in the number of medical students as between now and 10 years ago indicates quite clearly that the vile campaign conducted by some of the medical profession suggesting that doctors are leaving this country in droves, is absolute nonsense—because most consultants are still putting their sons and daughters into the medical profession?

That would be a reasonable conclusion to draw from the figures.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will pay a visit to Stirling University.

I have no such plans at present.

Will my right hon. Friend please try to arrange a visit to Stirling University, which is in my constituency, so that he can see at first hand the effect of some of the cuts in educational expenditure? Will he give me the chance to introduce him to many of the students who are suffering real hardship because of inadequate grants, and to many of the staff who are doing a good job and yet are receiving a lower salary than are many people who are doing a similar job in other educational establishments?

I should certainly not wish to go to Stirling University without the benefit of the counsel and, if possible, the presence of my hon. Friend the Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan). I was appointed to my present position when the universities were about to start their summer vacation. I have so far managed to visit three universities, but I hope to visit more in the future. However, in view of the financial constraints, the message which I have received everywhere is not dissimilar to that which my hon. Friend has put forward concerning Stirling University. There is no doubt that the financial position is a great strain on our universities and I want to pay tribute to the work which they are doing. I do not know of any area in the world where higher education is organised as effectively and so efficiently in cost-benefit terms as in the United Kingdom.

Does the Minister agree that one way of protecting our universities in Scotland and enabling them to have a larger budget would be to ensure that the Scottish universities come under the Scottish Assembly and are not governed by the United Kingdom Government through a British University Grants Committee?

The hon. Lady should not tempt me to try to anticipate my right hon. Friend's White Paper. Whatever his view on the matter mentioned by the hon. Lady, I should need more persuasive arguments than hers to come to the conclusion that she seems to have reached.

The right hon. Gentleman paid a fine tribute to the universities. Is he aware that nothing has damaged morale more than the way that the university staff's pay claim has been bungled and the degree to which there has been procrastination under this Government? Is he also aware that the university staff are not trying to break the pay limits established by the Government, but that they feel sore at having been let down by the Secretary of State when the starting date was fixed at 1st September and not 1st October? Will he admit publicly that they have suffered an injustice, and will he try to correct the situation as soon as circumstances permit?

I do not know where the hon. Gentleman got his information from. I do not think that any of the university staff would want the Government's counter-inflation policy to be broken specifically for them. As to the date of the settlement, if the hon. Gentleman had a vestige of knowledge about the problem, he would know that the 12-months rule is an integral part of trying to contain wage inflation, as is the £6 limit. If the Opposition would go on record and say that they do not care about trying to stick to the 12-months rule, or about defending the £6 limit, we would know exactly where we were.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he has yet received the final report from the technical investigation group on public lending right.

Yes, Sir.

May I remind the hon. Gentleman that the experiment quoted in the interim report indicated that for every £1 million spent on public lending right, the successful writer of popular fiction might get £1,260, whereas the writer of Welsh fiction might receive £2? Is it the language of Socialist priorities that such meagre benefits should be given to Welsh or specialist writers, and that such generous State subsidy should be given to authors like Harold Robbins?

The hon. Gentleman has got it wrong. It is by no means the intention that when public lending right comes into being the whole pool should be scooped by the most popular writers. The intention, which will be developed when the Bill comes before the House, will be demonstrated in practice. The figures given by the hon. Gentleman are incorrect.

May we have a categorical assurance from the Under-Secretary of State that, after long-broken promises, the Government have at last summoned enough resolve to introduce this matter in the next Session?

The Government have never had any doubt about their intention to introduce a public lending right, but my hon. Friend will understand that I cannot anticipate the Gracious Speech.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will introduce legislation to provide a review body for promotions within schools and colleges; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the review body would help to take away from headmasters and college principals the air of patronage which frequently accompanies promotions within education institutions? It is the "blue-eyed boy" syndrome, which is not exclusive to education institutions. Does my right hon. Friend agree that a review body would give an air of impartiality and fairness that would be widely welcomed by both teachers and lecturers?

The Burnham Committee is to undertake a review of the points system, which has a bearing on the number of promoted posts. It would be wholly wrong if we sought to deal nationally with what must be a local matter. It is for local education authorities to determine how they promote teachers and how, within the schools, the various jobs are filled. That job must be done by the local education authorities. As far as I know, the teachers' unions have not put forward any alternative suggestions.

While accepting that this is a matter for the local education authority, may I ask whether the Minister agrees that governors of school boards have an important part to play in matters of this kind, and a constructive rôle in deciding who should be appointed to these posts?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. I am sure that that is an aspect to which the Taylor Committee will address itself. It is for local education authorities to decide whom should be appointed as governors in their schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what representations he has received regarding the optimum number of pupils in secondary school classes.

None. The average class size in maintained secondary schools in January 1975 was 22·4.

I do not think that there should be any effect from phasing out the direct grant. I am hoping that a great number of the direct grant schools will join the maintained system. In the next year we are hoping to make arrangements, within the rate support grant system, which will avoid any deterioration in the staff-pupil ratio, although we shall not be able to make any improvements. Whether the staff-pupil ratio is maintained will depend largely on the local authorities. Although we calculate the national total of rate support grant system on the assumption that expenditure on education by local authorities will reach a certain level, we have no means of ensuring that the local authorities spend the money on education.

I must protest strongly at the sordid way in which the House is being treated over this Bill, even in its dying stages. The Bill was disgracefully handled on Report. A mass of Government amendments was flung at us very late in the day and we made our views clear on the matter then. Today we are faced with exactly the same situation. We are being asked to deal with 186 Lords amendments, with the Government seeking to disagree with or amend some 29 of them. The grouping of those which have been put forward allows for nearly 50 debates, and of course some of the Government amendments to the Lords amendments are quite new.

I must congratulate the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. Raison) on finding a new means of delaying the House at this stage. I well recall that when consideration by the Commons of Lords amendments to the Local Government Bill took place, over 600 amendments were involved. We did not receive them until an hour or so before we were to debate them. The right hon. Member for Crosby (Mr. Page) was in charge at that time.