To ask the secretary of State for Education and Employment what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the nursery voucher scheme. [188]

We have done an assessment and have found that the bureaucratic and administrative costs of the voucher scheme are unacceptable, that the loss of places in the voluntary sector and the closure of private providers are unacceptable and that, therefore, the voucher scheme urgently needs review.

I offer my congratulations to my right hon. Friend on his appointment. I thank him for his reply. It has, indeed, been a damaging scheme. It has caused early years education providers in the Forest of Dean huge amounts of unnecessary work, while not extending provision, and it has caused the closure of an excellent playgroup in Churcham. What assurances can my hon. Friend give parents and providers in England that we will soon be rid of the scheme?

I am happy to tell my hon. Friend that the voucher scheme will end as from the end of the summer term this year. The ill-conceived scheme will be set aside in favour of a new start for early years education based on a partnership between the voluntary, private and education authority sectors, which will work together to draw up development plans at local level and to ensure that, instead of bureaucracy, we can provide free places for all four-year-olds and eventually for all three-year-olds as well. The money will be ring-fenced; that provision will be based on the development plans put to the Department so that we can establish early years forums in which all people can play their part in fulfilling their pledge to give children free places rather than a paper promise.

I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman and his team on their new positions. I hope that they enjoy their work at the Department for Education and Employment.

I thank the right hon. Lady for her normal courtesy and welcome her back to the Commons. I hope that I can return the courtesy that she paid me.—[Interruption.] Which she did.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on his appointment and on his statement to the House today. I am sure that he will be well aware that the people of Norfolk who participated in the piloting of the nursery scheme will be highly delighted to see it abandoned. As the former chair of the education committee in Norfolk, I know that, although some good was done, the special circumstances meant that there was considerable waste. Will my right hon. Friend please repeat today the promise that he has made in the past to ensure that the people of Norfolk are not put at any disadvantage because they participated in the piloting of the scheme?

I am delighted to give my hon. Friend the assurance that all existing places will be safeguarded so that those who have redeemed vouchers will be able to carry them through into the autumn where places exist this summer, as part of the new partnership with the voluntary and private sector. What is more, we will start the process of piloting early years centres to draw together nursery education and early years care and ensure that parents are involved in the process of family learning.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment when he will approve outstanding applications for grant-maintained status. [191]

Outstanding applications for grant-maintained status will be considered on their individual merits and will be decided as soon as possible.

Will the hon. Lady guarantee that the grant-maintained schools that are currently in place and those that are due to be approved will continue to be free to set their own admissions policy?

We are keen to raise standards for everyone, and the key to that is to put aside the arguments on structure and begin to look at what goes on in the classroom in terms of the quality of teaching and learning. We can guarantee that all schools will flourish under Labour under the new partnership that we have set out in our document.

Will my hon. Friend congratulate the parents of Meadow County primary school in my constituency who, in the heat of the general election campaign, decided by two votes to one against going grant-maintained? Will she encourage those few governors who are still trying to fight a rearguard action against the democratic wishes of the majority of the parents to realise that their efforts will be wasted?

I am happy to congratulate my hon. Friend's school on the good quality of education that it provides for the pupils whom it serves. I hope that the school will now concentrate, as it no doubt has done in the past, on standards and put behind it the divisiveness that is a feature of many grant-maintained school ballots.

Does the hon. Lady understand that her statement is already hollow, because the Government have closed Mount St. Mary's school in Exeter? The previous Secretary of State pledged that it would be given grant-maintained status, but that is now being refused by the current Minister's colleagues. That means that the letter sent to parents which stated that there would be places for all children at the school is completely false. Today, parents have been approaching me and my hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning) as they try to find places for their children. When will the Labour party realise that closing good schools is a falsehood?

I fear that the right hon. Gentleman is misguided in his comments; if he consults his right hon. Friend the former Secretary of State for Education and Employment, he will be told that no decision was given on the school to which he referred.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proposals he has for providing emergency finance for education authorities to prevent any increase in class sizes in the current year. [192]

We have no such proposals. The funding that schools receive this year has been based on decisions made by the previous Administration. However, we shall introduce a Bill later today that will lead to a reduction in class size for every five, six and seven-year-old in the country.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment.

I can give my hon. Friend two assurances. First, I would be more than willing to meet a deputation led by him and including representatives from North East Lincolnshire. Secondly, there is no doubt that particular difficulties are being experienced by unitary authorities. We have begun a review of the education element of the standard spending assessment, to ensure that the distribution of that grant is far fairer than it was under the previous Administration. I am confident that, in the process of doing that, we will be able to offer some hope to unitary authorities such as North East Lincolnshire.

I welcome the Minister to his first outing at the Dispatch Box. I reiterate my congratulations to him and the rest of his team.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his initial comments. He has rehearsed an argument put to the British people in the run-up to the general election on 1 May. The British people spoke on that day. We have made education our No. 1 priority—which is why, 21 days after polling day, we have announced the abolition of the nursery voucher scheme and why today we are introducing a Bill to reduce class sizes. This Government are taking positive action to benefit all our children, rather than using warm words which would no nothing to help them.

I welcome my hon. Friend to his new position. I thank him and his team for sending help squads into two schools in my constituency. I know that that will be welcomed by the parents, the pupils and all those involved in the schools.

I thank my hon. Friend for her initial comments. When I meet Lambeth local education authority in the next two weeks to discuss the question of failing schools within that authority, I will also raise the issue of children who are disenchanted with the education currently offered to them.

What contribution to a reduction in class sizes in grant-maintained schools will be made by the Minister's proposal to remove 10 per cent. of their funding?

I am afraid that the right hon. Lady is wrong about our policy. There is no commitment to reduce by 10 per cent. the delegation of funding to grant-maintained schools. When we publish our White Paper in June, she will find our proposals for that specific area very informative.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will make a statement about Government policy on legislation to combat age discrimination in employment. [193]

The Government are strongly opposed to age discrimination at work. We shall be consulting widely to obtain a consensus on how we can best proceed to achieve that.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his appointment. As there is no age discrimination in this place—there are hon. Members of 24 years of age and upwards, and I shall not mention my own age—why should age discrimination be allowed to continue? It undoubtedly causes much hardship among those in their 40s and early 50s who find tremendous difficulties in getting another job and are discriminated against simply because of their age. As we promised legislation and I introduced a private Member's Bill which was wrecked by the Opposition, would my right hon. Friend agree that a law should now be passed in much the same way as we legislated against discrimination on grounds of race, gender and disability?

My hon. Friend is right to say that discrimination on the ground of age must be ended, and he is right to say that the role of legislation must be examined. I pay tribute to the efforts that he has made and the energy he has expended on campaigning to end discrimination on the ground of age. Before we proceed to legislate, we shall need to consult interested parties, groups that would be affected, including those representing elderly people, employers and those with expertise such as my hon. Friend. We strongly believe that age discrimination is wrong, and we shall implement proposals to stop it, with the support, I hope, of the vast majority of hon. Members.

I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his appointment to the Front Bench and on his rapid reversal of the Labour Government's pledge to legislate. I warn him that the legislative route, while seeming attractive, has many pitfalls. Someone has to be 21 years of age to enter the House, but that age limit would be illegal under such legislation, as might requiring people to retire at 65. I urge the right hon. Gentleman genuinely to consult rather than to go straight ahead with the proposals of the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick).

We certainly shall consult. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his congratulations. He is right to say that the subject involves many complexities, but there were complexities relating to legislation against racial and sexual discrimination—arguments similar to those that he advanced were used against such legislation. The fact that the matter is complex is an argument for careful consideration and consultation, but it is not an argument for doing nothing.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what steps he is taking to support the work of the International Labour Organisation. [194]

My right hon. Friend the Minister of State will be representing the United Kingdom at the annual ILO conference next month. We shall give the ILO full support for its activities, particularly its promotion of international labour standards and human rights.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment as Minister and on his election as Member of Parliament for the great steel-producing town of Newport. You and I, Madam Speaker, who have held only one party card in our lives, will know how difficult it is to switch to another party. After the putsch by the old Etonians and anti-Europeans of the 1922 Committee yesterday, may I invite the remaining one-nation and pro-European Tories to come across and join us before it is too late?

Answer.

With friends such as my hon. Friend, it is so much easier. Of course the United Kingdom should support the International Labour Organisation, whose aims are to encourage productive employment and to improve standards and conditions of work worldwide.

Rubbish.

The hon. Gentleman says that is rubbish, but he will now have plenty of time on his hands to reconsider the simple view that deregulation to the ultimate degree, a cult of low pay and the absence of employee rights lead to some sort of economic nirvana. That view has been extensively disproved in the Conservative experiment of recent years, in which the poor and the unemployed in this country have been the victims.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proposals he has for increasing opportunities for training for people between 16 and 20 years of age; and if he will make a statement. [195]

We have a wide range of proposals for improving young people's participation in high-quality education and training. In England, as in Wales, the Government will take these forward in a positive and open manner.

I congratulate the Minister on his appointment and wish him well in post. Obviously, it should be a priority to get youngsters back into work, and one avenue for doing so is through high-quality training. May I remind the Minister that there are some places in Wales where youth unemployment is as high as 33 per cent? May I therefore urge on him the need for quick and telling action in this particular field?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his kind remarks. I am very much aware of the problems of youth unemployment, especially in his constituency, which suffered the closure of the Trawsfynydd nuclear power station and a number of other staple employers in the area. Under our new deal arrangements, we shall put 13,000 young people either to work in the voluntary sector or into high-quality training and education opportunities; and we shall make sure that the problems he has outlined will be addressed very quickly. I know that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales is well aware of the situation in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, and he has told me himself that he will pay special attention to it very quickly.

After such welcome training, does my hon. Friend believe that there is a real chance under his policies of future jobs in manufacturing?

In Wales, we have been fortunate in attracting a great deal of inward investment, especially in the manufacturing sector. That is due mainly to the setting up of the Welsh Development Agency, which Labour set up and which the Tories opposed right from the beginning. We recognise that, in order for us to take that forward, to attract more investment and to do something that the last Government were incapable of doing—grow indigenous industry in Wales—the next tranche of investment will go to the best trained, best educated work force, and that is what we aim to create.

I add my congratulations to the hon. Gentleman on his assumption of his new responsibilities. His and the Labour party's determination to reduce unemployment among young people is an entirely admirable aim; however, when he spends the money from the windfall tax, how many real jobs will that create? How many other people will lose their jobs because of job substitution? How many of those young people will end up back on the dole, because the voluntary force that he has decided on will not create a single job?

It is rather ripe for former Tory Ministers to get up and talk about people going back on the dole, after the carnage that they created in constituencies like mine over many years, when unemployment rose to more than 3 million and probably to more than 4 million. I will tell you this—

Order. This is not an election campaign.

I beg your pardon, Madam Speaker—I forgot myself for a moment.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what steps he intends to take to allow local authorities greater freedom to tackle the backlog of repairs to school buildings. [196]

We greatly sympathise with the position in which schools and colleges throughout the country find themselves, with a legacy of more than £3 billion of disrepair. Shortly we shall make proposals for a public-private partnership, based on a consortium of local education authorities, schools and financial institutions, which will free the money to tackle that backlog and ensure that our teachers and pupils have an environment fit to work in.

I thank the Secretary of State for that answer. Is he aware that he has inherited a terrible situation from the previous, Conservative, Government, in that one in five secondary schools and one in seven primary schools have substandard accommodation? In my constituency, Lewes, at Wivelsfield primary school, more than 60 per cent. of children are in so-called temporary buildings—ramshackle buildings that have been up for more than 10 years. Will the Secretary of State acknowledge that reliance on public-private projects alone will not necessarily produce the answer? Can he estimate the likely value of private finance initiative projects to repair crumbling buildings in the next 12 months?

I agree with the first part of the question. There is a chronic situation in schools throughout the country, with leaking roofs, window frames that do not fit, temporary classrooms that have been temporary for the best part of 40 or 50 years and remaining outside toilets. We are determined to tackle that backlog and that legacy. We shall have a considered programme, which we shall want to discuss with the local authorities and the financial institutions. I of course accept that that will not be the sole answer to the question; we must apply existing capital resources and permission to borrow sensitively and carefully, to ensure that, together, the partnership and the borrowing requirement enable us to tackle that backlog during the present Parliament.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the second part of his answer today—PFI plus borrowing requirement—is an essential part of the attempt to solve that problem? It is a particular problem for flat-top schools built in the 1960s and 1970s and it is a considerable problem for schools in the voluntary sector. Will he ensure that representatives of the voluntary sector are included in any decisions?

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that issue. The flat roofs that exist throughout the country are a bit like the flat earth policy of the Conservative party—it has many leaks in it and consequently requires urgent repair. The need for repair exists regardless of the status of school or its category in terms of aid, and we shall discuss, with the Churches and others, ways in which they might join the partnership and work with us to tackle that backlog of disrepair.

How does the right hon. Gentleman propose to tackle authorities like Islington, which, whatever the date of their buildings, provide a lamentable education?

After 18 years of Conservative rule—[Interruption.] After 18 years of Conservative rule at national level, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that, in the first three weeks in government, we have acted decisively where failure exists to ensure that every child in every school—in Islington and elsewhere—receives the standard and quality of education that we would expect for our own children.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment how much money will be available for reducing class sizes through the phasing out of the assisted places scheme. [197]

One hundred and eighty million pounds will be available over time as a result of the phasing out of the assisted places scheme, which is in the forward public expenditure survey predictions inherited from the previous Government, £100 million of which will be available by the year 2000 to be used to reduce class sizes and fulfil our pledge.

Does the Secretary of State agree that his reply represents tremendously good news for schools throughout the country—[Laughter.]—not least for schools in Reading, East, the constituency that I represent? Redlands county primary school in Reading now has two reception classes where it had three, and five-year-olds are being taught in classes of 36 and 37.

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend and congratulate her on her question. One can see why Conservative Members are so depleted—they laugh at the prospect of £100 million being spent in the next three years on reducing class sizes which, under their regime, went up in the primary sector by a staggering 40 per cent. in terms of those taught in classes of more than 30. It is a measure of the despair of Conservative Members that they think it is funny that children are taught in large classes.

We welcome any additional money for schools, but will the Secretary of State explain how a substantial reduction in class sizes will take place in Somerset if his right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions imposes the iniquitous Conservative capping proposals on the county and 90 teachers are sacked?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that my party made no promises that we could not fulfil. I have stated clearly what the situation will be for the current financial year and we intend to treat all local authorities with fairness. Each of them knew what the situation was and, regrettably, will have to plan on a budget that was not of our making and in circumstances which we hope to reverse during the lifetime of this Parliament.

Does my right hon. Friend remember being told ad nauseam by the previous Government that, contrary to the common sense of most of the people of this country and to the views of parents everywhere, the size of classes in schools was of no importance? If any civil servants in his Department still give advice to that effect, will he send them away on a retraining course—preferably in small groups?

I can confirm to my hon. Friend that we are strongly in favour of small groups of people concentrating their minds on the agenda of the new Government, rather than that of the old. I can also confirm. that class sizes make a difference, and that is why some people choose to spend a great deal of their own money on buying smaller class sizes in the private sector.

I would like a direct answer to a direct question. Some 36,000 of our brightest children will be robbed by this Government of a future assisted place scheme. What will it cost to educate those children back in the state sector?

I can promise the hon. Lady one thing—there will be a great deal more straight talking and straight answers from this Government than there ever was when she and her colleagues answered questions. The assisted places scheme was not geared to the brightest in the country—the brightest in the country exist in all schools and deserve a good education. There is a profound difference in values between the parties.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proposals he has to extend the use of information technology in higher education. [198]

We shall be looking to the Dearing inquiry to take into account the new possibilities opened up by information technology in its recommendations on the future development and delivery of higher education.

May I welcome my hon. Friend to his post? I hope that, within the Department for which he has responsibility, there is appreciation of the original thinking that he will bring to its work. Is not the reality that any growth in higher education in the United Kingdom will not now come by way of expanding existing single-site universities, but by developing information technology in higher education and distance learning in the way that—I might say modestly—I suggested in my proposals for a university of the lakes two years ago? What is the Government's position on the matter?

I recall the impressive report which my hon. Friend circulated on the university of the lakes and on the state of higher and further education in Cumbria. I hope that we can now revisit it, because he is right about the need for new approaches to the delivery of education at all levels, especially further and higher education. He will understand, however, that we cannot comment specifically on any project, given that Sir Ron Dearing's inquiry will soon report to the House.

Although I welcome the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues to the Front Bench and, even in respect of this question, welcome some aspects of their answers, does he agree that information technology should be the practice of all engaged in higher education, including the humanities and more obvious subjects? Will he undertake to take a sympathetic line, subject to the Dearing recommendations, in respect of access and outreach, with particular reference to remote rural areas?

I should like to agree with everything that the hon. Gentleman said. The opportunity now available for the delivery of higher and further education, especially to remote rural areas, is tremendous. The sooner we get on with it, the better.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what policies his Department is considering to ensure that quality assurance is focused more on children within schools than between schools. [199]

The Government's overriding priority is to raise standards of achievement for every pupil, hence the clear targets that we have set for improvements in literacy and numeracy. However, we shall achieve those targets only if the weakest schools improve to the level of the better schools.

I welcome my hon. Friend on her appointment from the chalk face to ministerial office and, at the same time, welcome the Government's special measures action recovery team to deal with failing schools and to help them to succeed, underlining that everything about this team is SMART. Does my hon. Friend share the concerns expressed that under the previous Government judgments on failing schools were made too late? Does she accept that local authorities' quality assurance processes and schools' internal quality assurance systems must be strengthened to deal with problems in schools?

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind comments and for welcoming the SMART programme. He is absolutely right. This week, the Government took action in respect of 18 schools that had been failing pupils for at least 18 months. The previous Government had taken no action to ensure that those schools improved. We should aim to have no schools failing pupils and to identify problems before that happens so that improvements can be made. One of the problems with the system has always been that, whereas an external inspection system can identify weaknesses, there has been no programme of support for schools that are in that position. That is exactly the area with which we wish to deal in the forthcoming months.

Are not parents—and tax payers, too, for that matter—entitled to know about the relative performance of different schools? I accept that it may be uncomfortable for a school to come low in a league table, but at least it is identified as being in need of some assistance.

The hon. Gentleman is right. All parents have the right to know how their children perform, whether they are reaching the targets rightly set for them and how the school is performing. Parents also want to know that, if there are problems in the school and the school is not achieving at the level expected, action will be taken. That key element has been missing from the system so far. We have made it clear that we will not accept failure in any school, no matter where it is. All the partners in the education service—school governing bodies, local authorities, central Government and parent—must now accept their responsibility for ensuring that we raise standards for all children in our schools.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her appointment, which she fully deserves. However, why was it necessary to publish the names of those failing schools? I am all in favour of help being given to failing schools but I cannot understand why those schools' names had to be published because it decreases the teachers' morale and I do not believe that it is necessary

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind comments and note the "however" that followed thereafter. It will have come as no news to anyone in the communities served by the schools that their school was failing. Parents, head teachers, governors and local authorities will have known for at least 18 months and, in some cases, for as long as two years, that their school was not up to scratch so the public airing of the school's name was not new.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what are his reasons for proposing to abolish the Grant Maintained Schools Foundation. [200]

The Grant Maintained Schools Foundation is a private company and its future is a matter for its directors.

Subject to parental support, do grant-maintained schools have a permanent place in the education service?

We made it clear in the run-up to the general election that we want to introduce a new structure into our school system, under which all schools will be treated fairly. A White Paper will be published in June which will give effect to those proposals. The Government's priority, however, is not to concentrate on structures, as did the previous Administration, which gave £2.5 million of taxpayers' money to the Grant Maintained Schools foundation—enough to pay the salaries of 100 primary school teachers. Our priority is to ensure that we improve the standards and quality of education that we offer to all our children.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what is his Department's policy towards educational scholarships. [201]

Scholarships are a matter for those organisations that award them.

I thank the hon. Lady for that helpful reply. Will she join me in congratulating Charles Mannon, the candidate that the Labour party put up in the Christchurch constituency in the general election, on the exemplary conduct that he displayed during the campaign? Does she agree that Mr. Mannon, who was educated at a public school with the benefit of an assisted place, is a supreme example of the value of the assisted places scheme, and of educational state scholarships?

I am happy to join the hon. Gentleman in congratulating Mr. Mannon on his behaviour during the general election campaign. I am only sorry that I cannot congratulate him on being in the House today. The Government are far more intent on the educational future of the children who are now at school than we are on the educational past of Labour party candidates.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what estimate he has made of the number of young people who have been unemployed for over six months who will be helped off welfare and into work. [202]

At present there are 178,000 people aged between 18 and 24 who have been claimants, unemployed for longer than six months. In addition, on current trends, we envisage that each month around 25,000 young people reach the six-months threshold. The Government's commitment is to get 250,000 young people off benefits and into work.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply, which is most welcome. Nowhere is that news more urgently needed than in my constituency, Bethnal Green and Bow. Is my hon. Friend aware that my constituency has the highest number of under-25s in Britain, and also one of the highest levels of youth unemployment, with more than one quarter of the unemployed being under 25? The situation is particularly bad for the ethnic minority community: 36 per cent. of Afro-Caribbeans and 48 per cent. of the Bangladeshi community are suffering from unemployment. Does my hon. Friend agree, therefore, that Bethnal Green and Bow in particular, and east London in general should receive immediate assistance from the scheme?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on her question and the passion with which she rightly speaks about the needs of the young unemployed in her constituency. We shall carry forward the programme with jobs with private sector employers, work with the voluntary sector, places on the environmental task force and the option of full-time education and training to address basic skill needs. We shall carry the programme forward as quickly as possible to ensure that my hon. Friend's constituents and others who are unemployed get the help that they need, which they have been denied for far too long, so that they can make the most of their potential.

No one would doubt the hon. Gentleman's commitment to helping the young unemployed—a commitment that is shared on both sides of the House. However, his problem is that, on the one hand, he has that aspiration and, on the other, his party is committed to a national minimum wage that will destroy low-paid jobs. All experience shows that the low-paid jobs often sought by the unemployed will disappear first. Does the hon. Gentleman feel comfortable with that?

Experience from elsewhere—including the United States, which has implemented the minimum wage—shows that it does no such thing: it is perfectly consistent with increasing the number of people in employment. If the hon. Gentleman genuinely shares our concern for the unemployed and our commitment to providing opportunities for them, he would listen to the electorate and what the people said in the recent general election campaign and get behind our drive to get people off welfare and into work.

Toector is ca ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will make a statement about the operation of the system of the sixth form colleges. [203]

The 109 sixth form colleges in England make a vital contribution to the education and training of our young people. The Government are determined that sixth form colleges shall continue to flourish.

Does the Minister agree that the sixth form sector has been extremely successful in making efficiency gains? What extra efficiency gains does the Minispable of making? Can he assure the House that, whatever demands are made upon the sector, the Government will provide the funding?

We are aware of the efficiency gains that have been made in sixth form colleges, and of the increasing co-operation between those colleges and other further education institutions. We shall ensure that those efficiency gains continue, and that there is adequate provision for decent education through both sixth form colleges and colleges of further education.

Can the Minister confirm that he has taken urgent steps to fill the funding gap left for sixth form colleges and for the further education sector generally as a result of the withdrawal of the demand-led element? Is it not right that colleges should meet the commitments that they entered into by September?

I confirm that the Government have no intention of reneging on the financial arrangements made by the previous Government amid the shambles of the demand-led funding element. We shall ensure that the contracts that have been entered into are maintained.

Does the Minister anticipate any end to the efficiency gains that can be made by sixth form colleges and colleges of further education?

There are many opportunities for continuing efficiency gains, not least of which is the proper application of information technology and other new technologies for education. I am looking forward to future gains and to better quality education all round.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proportion of the sums that will be taken from grant-maintained schools under his proposals will be delegated directly to schools. [204]

We are committed to establishing a funding system that does not discriminate unfairly between schools or pupils. We shall take work forward on that basis and will consult widely on specific proposals.

Will the Minister give us some idea of what principles will guide the re-allocation of that money?

The principles will be fairness and justice —and we saw very little of that under the previous Administration. This Government are about valuing all our children, not just a few. All of our policies will be based on those clear, fundamental principles.

On the subject of fairness and justice, I remind the hon. Gentleman of the letter that he sent me two days ago, outlining why the Secretary of State had refused GM status to a Roman Catholic senior school for girls in Exeter. In the final paragraph of that letter, he informed me:

"At local level, a spirit of partnership will prevail to help those parents whose children will not be able to return to Mount St. Mary's in September."

I am pleased to see the hon. Lady in her place. I thank her for the small part that she played in ensuring such a victory for the Labour party at the general election.

Come on, let us have it. What about fairness and justice?

It is clear that the hon. Lady is not aware of the specific recommendations that were made by officials for grant-maintained status. Clear recommendations were made, and on balance my right hon. Friend decided to reject the application. The application was rejected, based on the principles of fairness and justice.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will review Her Majesty's Government's plans for dealing with unemployment levels in seaside towns in the south-east. [206]

We will indeed. We cannot accept unemployment at its present level, whether in seaside towns in the south-east or anywhere else. That is why we are already engaged in detailed and urgent work to introduce our new programmes to help the long-term unemployed and get 250,000 young people into jobs. The hon. Gentleman will be aware that his constituents are benefiting from the European programme KONVER II and that they are eligible to benefit from European social funding objective 3. Possibly the hon. Gentleman would regard those as tainted sources.

Is the Minister prepared to be serious and to tell me how much cash has come to Southend, East, as set against the monstrous amount of grants, loans and subsidies going to other parts of the country? Perhaps he should take the issue more seriously. Does he accept that the seaside towns have a real problem of high unemployment? My constituency has unemployment of more than 10 per cent. That creates a great deal of misery and lack of opportunity. Will the Minister be prepared to consider establishing a special study to examine whether there is an equal sphere of public investment? Secondly, should there not be a study of the utter distortion that is created by grants, loans and subsidies that are given to other areas with much lower rates of unemployment?

The funding from the KONVER II programme to the hon. Gentleman's constituency is £105,000. Much more substantially, the hon. Gentleman's constituents are benefiting from single regeneration budget funding of £2.2 million to regenerate the area of Shoeburyness. The hon. Gentleman is right in contending that these programmes must be kept under review, and that is what we shall do. Apart from anything else, we need the most accurate and up-to-date map of unemployment. Much unemployment is concentrated in compact, tightly drawn geographical areas. In those areas, we need to understand as much as we can about the nature of the local unemployment problem.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what steps the Government are taking to agree and publish national targets for training in appropriate IT skills. [207]

The development of appropriate IT skills is a clear priority both for young people and adults. We are currently considering whether setting a national target is the most effective way to proceed.

I wish warmly to respond to my hon. Friend's positive note. I know that national standards will help young people in Luton to obtain access to jobs in future. I commend to my hon. Friend particularly a project involving Luton council and the Luton-Dunstable partnership, which involves IT skills and standards, and which is of particular benefit in helping women in my constituency to gain access to employment.

I thank my hon. Friend. I shall examine closely the Luton scheme if she will furnish me with details of it. My hon. Friend is right to highlight the value of information technology skills. It is no exaggeration to say that if children do not have IT skills it is a loss as great as not being able to write or to be numerate when it comes to finding employment in what is becoming increasingly an electronically based economy.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment how many nursery vouchers had been issued to parents in England at the latest date for which information is available. [208]

At the beginning of this week, some 618,000 vouchers for the summer term had been sent to parents of eligible four-year-olds in England.

Can the hon. Lady say how great an increase she expects to see in the provision of nursery places for four-year-olds in the first year of the new scheme that the Government now plan to introduce?

Yes. We do expect to see an increase in the number of places available for four-year-olds and we have a target to achieve that by September of next year. The hon. Gentleman must remember that what we now have available is all the money that his Government wasted in expensive advertising and bureaucracy. We intend to put that towards providing good-quality education for four-year-olds.

I welcome all that the Minister and my colleagues on the Government Front Bench have said this afternoon about nursery education and the ending of nursery vouchers, but will she say that the Government now recognise the importance of nursery education to our children and that, in due course, nursery education will be included in the standard spending assessment for education?

We have always recognised the importance of early years education. In fact, many Labour local authorities throughout the country have excellent records in ensuring that the children in their areas receive it. We will, of course, develop plans so that not only will all four-year-olds receive good quality nursery education, but that that opportunity will also be available to three-year-olds.

May I ask the Leader of the House to give us the business for after the Whitsun recess?

The business for the first week back after the recess will be as follows:

• MONDAY 2 JUNE—Until 10 pm, Second Reading of the Education (Schools) Bill.
• Motion on the Northern Ireland (Entry to Negotiations, etc) Act 1996 (Revival of Section 3) Order.
• TUESDAY 3 JuNE—Consideration in Committee of the Referendums (Scotland and Wales) Bill.
• WEDNESDAY 4 JUNE—Until 2 pm, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
• Starting at 3.30 pm, conclusion of consideration in Committee and remaining stages of the Referendums (Scotland and Wales) Bill.
• Motion on the Select Committee on the Modernisation of the House of Commons.
• THURSDAY 5 JuNE—Consideration in Committee and remaining stages of the Education (Schools) Bill.
• FRIDAY 6 JUNE—Debate on the governance of London on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
• MONDAY 9 JUNE—Debate on the European Union on a Government motion.
• Motion on the Draft Firearms (Amendment) Act 1997 compensation scheme.

I thank the right hon. Lady. May I remind her that she said that she would give us two weeks' business, where possible? Can she give any indication of the likely business for the rest of the week beginning Monday 9 June?

I shall endeavour to answer all the questions that have been put to me, which I hope will reduce the number of questions that others might put later, particularly in view of the time.

rose—

Order. Of necessity, that was a long exchange. I do not intend to take long statements from Back Benchers; they should be brisk, limited to one question and directly to the point.

Has my right hon. Friend seen early-day motion 38?

I am not sure that it will be possible to arrange the kind of debate that my hon. Friend envisages. He may know, however, that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has announced his intention to attend the summit, and he will be addressing the United Nations General Assembly in New York towards the end of June. The Government have made it clear that the goal of sustainable development is one of the major challenges we face, is important to Government policy, and will be taken on board by all Ministers. Although I cannot promise the debate that my hon. Friend wants, I hope that he will think that that is a step in the right direction.

In view of the leadership bid that we heard just now from the acting shadow Leader of the House, may I reassure the House that I am making no such bid in relation to my party?

Not until the second round.

We might make a bid for the leadership of the hon. Gentleman's party in the second round.

The hon. Gentleman will know that the issue of capping was raised by one of his hon. Friends during yesterday's Adjournment debate. We believe that caps are necessary in certain circumstances, and, when an authority is capped, it has 28 days in which to challenge the decision. The hon. Gentleman may also have noticed that his hon. Friend the Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon (Dr. Harris) has secured a debate on Wednesday week about one of the authorities concerned.

May I ask my right hon. Friend—in a constructive way—whether it would be possible, during the week when we return, to hear a statement outlining what the Government intend to do to ensure that all parties represented in the House of Commons must themselves ensure that hon. Members have a vote in the leadership ballot? Would that not prevent a situation in which 164 Tory Members of Parliament can decide who should be the Leader of the Opposition?

My hon. Friend will, I think, acknowledge that I have no responsibility for elections in other parties. [Interruption.] The hon. Member says, "Quite right." I must admit that I am very glad that I do not have any such responsibility, and I think that many Opposition Members wish that they did not, either.

Can the Leader of the House clarify the position relating to the referendums Bill? Will there be a timetable motion before we debate it on the Floor of the House? If so, how much time does the right hon. Lady expect that the House will be given to discuss that extremely important Bill? Is she prepared to extend the time when she sees how many amendments have been tabled, if there are a great many?

We have provided a day and a half for Second Reading. The Bill is simple and straightforward; there has already been considerable debate on it, and more will follow today. We are providing two full days, and I hope that that will be adequate. Given the nature of the Bill, I think that it will be.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that the last Government left a number of nasty little time bombs ticking away in the transport world, including the franchises that have been granted to privatised railways. Will she assure us that, when the Select Committees are set up, there will be a separate Select Committee on Transport to consider many of the problems that we face?

I am sympathetic to the need for a separate Select Committee, which will form part of the discussions through the usual channels.

The Leader of the House will be aware that the NATO summit takes place in July in Madrid. One of the most important items on the agenda will be the enlargement of NATO, which will have profound effects not only on the defence of our realm but on the cost of NATO membership. As no specific day was set aside for a debate on defence during the debates on the Loyal Address, could the right hon. Lady give an undertaking that the House will have an opportunity to debate defence matters between now and the end of June? In particular, some reports from the Select Committee on Defence in the last Parliament are still on the Table awaiting a Government reply.

I understand the hon. Gentleman's point. The parliamentary timetable is extremely crowded, but I will look at the matter that he raises. I remind him that there will be Defence questions on 16 June, during which he could raise some of the issues that he mentions.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is a bit rich for Tory Members who have already taken part in these exchanges to ask for extra time for common market debates, when, not so long ago, in the memory of almost everybody here, we had to drag a Tory Minister kicking and screaming from a Committee Room upstairs to have even a one-day debate on the common market?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's comments about EU debates in the past. I hope that we will not see such spectacles in future. He asked about social security issues and outstanding work. We all know from our casework the problems that the CSA and other agencies have created. I know that my hon. Friends in the appropriate Department are anxious to streamline procedures and to move quickly, because, as my hon. Friend says, there is a significant backlog of work, which requires a great deal of attention.

The right hon. Lady referred to the spectacle, as she put it, of a past debate. Of course, the need to hold that debate on the Floor of the House had to do with the stability pact. Does the right hon. Lady acknowledge that the forthwith motion that was tabled in consequence of the recommendations of the Select Committee on European Legislation has not yet been taken? Can she assure us that it will be dealt with soon? The Prime Minister is going to Noorddjik tomorrow, and that means that there will be a European Council meeting without a subsequent statement. Does she not agree that that is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs?

There will be a chance to raise all those issues in the debate that I have announced. The debate on 9 June will be to discuss all the issues raised at Amsterdam. I am sure that, given his usual interest in these matters, the hon. Gentleman will try to catch your eye, Madam Speaker, during that debate.

Thanks to the initiative of hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth (Mr. Healey), we have had an Adjournment debate on opencast mining. May we have a fully fledged debate on this matter? Labour published a 10-point programme on opencast mining which I used widely in my constituency, and we are keen to raise some matters from that. For instance, I should like to raise the question of the Avenue Court works, because I twice asked the previous Government to call in the planning agreements to operate in that area, and I ask for that to be done by this Government.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that subject, because, like him, I have a constituency interest, and, also like him, I campaigned on the issue during the general election. My hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth was fortunate to have an early debate on this, and I know that opencast mining concerns many people. I will bring my hon. Friend's comments to the attention of my ministerial colleagues.

Could the Leader of the House arrange for an urgent statement about the problems that are being experienced by Dayavanti Pictures, a film company that is trying to make a major feature film in the Scottish highlands? It has found that 16 of its cast and crew of 80 have suggested that they might be denied entry visas. A message has been passed to me in the past few seconds to the effect that circumstances might be improving.

I will look into the issue that the hon. Gentleman has raised. I presume that it is a matter of entry visas and work permits. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland is here on the Bench, and has also noted the hon. Gentleman's comments. We have not had any messages in the last few seconds such as the hon. Gentleman has had, so perhaps we are not so up to date as him, but we will look into the issue.

May I add my concern to that which has already been expressed that there should be an early opportunity to discuss early-day motion 38? The earth summit in New York is approaching. It will be attended by Heads of Government. We have a wonderful opportunity to put the environment at the heart of our new Government, after it was abandoned by the previous Government. I urge my right hon. Friend to consider the matter closely.

I note the comments of my hon. Friend. Perhaps this is a matter on which she and her colleagues could consider making an application for a Wednesday morning debate.

Will the right hon. Lady consider a short debate on standards in public life? Would it not give the House an opportunity to explore the paradox that, when the former Member of Parliament for Tatton was accused of impropriety, the Labour party said that he should be rejected from the House right away? As the Labour party has taken an entirely different attitude to the allegations in respect of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Govan (Mr. Sarwar), such a debate would provide an opportunity at this early stage in the Parliament to reject the charge of double standards, or perhaps no standards whatever.

The hon. Gentleman should welcome what the Labour party has done in Scotland in calling in the police. If there are any double standards, they have just been demonstrated by the hon. Gentleman.

Does my hon. Friend agree that any great reforming Labour Government would give priority first and foremost to its pensioners? When does she expect that the pensions review will take place? Has she seen and noted early-day motion 1, the first of this new Parliament?

A review cannot take place overnight, but my right hon. and hon. Friends in the Department of Social Security are considering the matter with a view to making progress as quickly as possible. I think that all hon. Members will acknowledge that it is a complex matter. We have made some clear commitments in the manifesto about the basic state pension as the foundation of pension provision, but an overall review will inevitably take some time.

May I refer back to the question asked by the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler), about local authority capital receipts? The right hon. Lady failed to respond to that part of his question. When do the Government intend to make some statement on the matter? Is it their intention to allow the authority in question to retain its own capital receipts and spend them, or to take that money away from some authorities and distribute it elsewhere?

I have to remind the hon. Gentleman that it was his Government who froze capital receipts. We have made it clear that there will be action to release capital receipts on a phased basis as soon as possible. It was mentioned during the debate on the Queen's Speech. When we come to the next stage, the appropriate statements will be made.

What is the prospect of a debate on Britain's aerospace industry? British Aerospace workers in my constituency are asking questions about grant aid for the CXX project—the future large aircraft project—and Raytheon workers are asking for a share of the Government's Astra project. Can my right hon. Friend help by providing a debate?

I am not sure whether we can have such a debate in the near future, but I will pass on my hon. Friend's concerns to right hon. Friends at the Department. My hon. Friend may want to consider that particular constituency interest as a matter on which to apply for an Adjournment Debate.

Will the right hon. Lady give priority to re-establishing the Select Committee on European Legislation and the associated Standing Committees? Will she assure the House that the Government will not agree to any European directive or other legislation that might now be pending until the proper process of parliamentary scrutiny has been followed through?

I have made it clear that I am extremely anxious to move quickly on the re-establishment of all Select Committees, and that would include all the Committees which also consider delegated or secondary legislation and European legislation.

Will my right hon. Friend consider whether it might be possible to find some time in the near future for a major debate on foreign affairs? I understand that it was not possible to hold such debate on the Queen's Speech. I am sure that she will appreciate, however, that current conditions in Kashmir, in Sri Lanka and particularly in the middle east are of great concern to a number of hon. Members who would welcome the opportunity for such a major debate, when we could raise our concerns with Foreign Office Ministers.

I understand my hon. Friend's concern, because he has always taken an interest in foreign affairs. As I said earlier, the parliamentary timetable is somewhat crowded at the moment. It was decided through the usual channels that there would not be a foreign affairs debate during the Queen's Speech, which would have normally provided an opportunity for hon. Members to express their concerns. We are therefore aware that there is a potential gap for such a debate, but I can only repeat that the parliamentary timetable is somewhat crowded. It might be difficult to find a suitable space, but I will bear in mind my hon. Friend's representations.

Notwithstanding the right hon. Lady's earlier reply, may I urge her to give absolute priority to the establishment of the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges, since those of us on the Conservative Benches at least believe that that is the right place for this House to reassert its belief that an individual is innocent until proven guilty, whether in Glasgow, Govan or in Tatton?

I have made it clear that I am very much in favour of the Standards and Privileges Committee continuing its work as quickly as possible.

May I add my voice to those of the two Labour Members who have stressed the importance of a debate on the Earth summit II? There are various ways in which that could be managed. It is terribly important that hon. Members who are interested should be able to convey to the Government the great importance that they attach to that major international event, probably the most important such event in which the Government will be involved this year. May I also suggest that there should be a statement following that summit?

The hon. Gentleman, who tabled the relevant early-day motion, is well known for his interest in such matters over many years, and I congratulate him on his persistence. He has said that the summit is an important event, and I hope that he will acknowledge that the Government have recognised it as such, because the Prime Minister himself has decided to attend. I will consider the hon. Gentleman's request about any possible need for a statement following the Earth Summit.

On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I should like to raise a point of order of which I have given you notice concerning a photograph of my right hon. Friend the Member for North—West Cambridgeshire (Dr. Mawhinney), which was published on page 9 of The Mirror yesterday. That paper produced a photograph that had been given to it, which showed my right hon. Friend taking a quick snack on the Terrace of the House of Commons.

Order. The right hon. Gentleman cannot do so; he must come to his point now.

The hon. Member for Oldham, East and Saddleworth is new. However, he gave a pledge to my right hon. Friend the Member for North—West Cambridgeshire that the picture would not be published; having then allowed it to be published must leave him open to considerable condemnation.

The rules for photography are perfectly clear. Hon. Members and visitors accompanied by hon. Members may take photographs on the Terrace. That arrangement is appreciated, and I certainly would not wish to stop it. However, no person may be photographed without his or her express permission anywhere within the precincts of the Palace of Westminster. New Members should take the trouble to familiarise themselves with the regulations on such matters—and, indeed, on the use of the Terrace in general.

Thank you, Madam Speaker—I apologise unreservedly. I very much regret the incident, and I have written to the right hon. Member for North—West Cambridgeshire (Dr. Mawhinney) saying so. The incident occurred last Wednesday, when a group of friends were on the Terrace. I was asked by a lady present to take a photograph, which I did. Much to my distress, I was informed a week later that it was to be published in the Daily Mirror. I subsequently wrote to the right hon. Gentleman expressing my distress and apologising to him.

Thank you.

I am happy to accept unreservedly the unreserved apology of the hon. Member for Oldham, East and Saddleworth (Mr. Woolas).

That is the end of the matter.

On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I know that you deplore long oral questions and equally discourage Ministers from giving long answers. Unfortunately, answers from the Dispatch Box tend to be longer, because Ministers want to give as much information as possible and the answers are read out.

The hon. Gentleman is correct: oral questions should not be read, but should be memorised and worked out over lunch; they should be two or three lines long and to the point, and they should be delivered briskly. Hon. Members should not come to the House not knowing what they are going to ask in their supplementary question, which should certainly not be read. Of course, from time to time one has to look at the odd word.

My point of order relates to the referendums Bill, and it may be more convenient if I raise it when the Bill is introduced.

Very well. It would in fact be better for the hon. Gentleman to do that.