If he will make a statement on the application of the PFI to the provision of new schools. [34894]

Following the successful award of the first PFI contract to replace Colfox school in Dorset, the Government have not stood still. We have recently announced support for a further 10 schools projects with a total capital value of almost £200 million. In addition, we are currently assessing proposals from local education authorities for five large-scale public-private partnership projects to be supported with funding through the new deal for schools. Projects under way and being considered represent a mixture of new schools, replacement schools and the repair and maintenance of schools. In every case, value for money in meeting need is a prime consideration.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply and for the outline of what the Government are doing about the replacement of schools. I should like to take this opportunity to thank him for the many other instances of help that he gives to Back-Bench Members. May I put to him the position of Wrenthorpe junior school in my constituency? It is 100 years old, decrepit and falling down. It is in a terrible state and needs to be replaced. If we cannot replace it through ordinary funding to the LEA, would it be possible to consider using the private finance initiative to replace that school?

Many local authorities are developing public-private partnerships to refurbish and repair their schools and many more are planning to do so. The projects range from individual primary school replacements to repair and maintenance schemes covering whole school estates. It is an exciting initiative and I welcome imaginative proposals from Wakefield LEA to use public-private partnerships to improve the standards in its schools.

The heads of governors and headmasters in Malmesbury, Chippenham and Wootton Bassett in my constituency who are currently working on a £21 million PFI bid will have been pleased to hear the Minister's support for the use of PFI in rebuilding schools. Will the Minister have a word with his unreconstructed socialist friends who run Swindon borough council and who are reported in the papers this morning as saying that they are wholly opposed to the Labour Government's use of PFI?

They have not told us that and, if they do, I will have a few words to say to them.

As the Minister will be aware, my local authority has to build 15 new schools in the next five years and such schools can be built only with the use of the PFI. Will my hon. Friend consider innovative ways of involving the private sector in a lifelong learning project that is not just about schools?

That is an important consideration. We want schools that are rebuilt and refurbished so that they can meet the needs of the communities that they serve. That means we need all sorts of imaginative approaches to PFI and PPP schemes. The initiative can be a positive bonus and guarantee streams of funding for the schools. It can mean that schools will be built more quickly and tailored more precisely to the needs of their communities.

How many children whose assisted places have been withdrawn he estimates will return to the state sector in the academic year 1998–99. [34895]

Fewer than 200 children currently in their last year of primary education will cease to hold an assisted place in the academic year 1998–99. With the money released from the phasing out of the scheme, we will cut class sizes this September for more than 100,000 five, six and seven-year-olds.

I hope that the Minister does not find that that is underestimate. Can he tell me how local education authorities whose schools are already full will be able to find places? Is he aware that, in Bromley, more than 900 pupils from out of the borough cram into already full schools? The trickle that started after the Greenwich ruling had turned into a flood long before selection was introduced a year ago. How can LEAs provide high-quality education when their schools are already at their limit?

The hon. Lady will be aware—if she was with us during the long hours of Tuesday night and Wednesday morning—that one of the reasons for the difficulties experienced in Bromley is the system of partial selection that has been introduced by some schools in the area. The measures adopted in the House on Tuesday night and Wednesday morning will enable us to tackle the difficulties and chaos caused by partial selection, as we will be able to operate a fair admissions policy in Bromley and across the country.

Does my hon. Friend agree that those who choose to opt out of the state system should not do so at the taxpayers' expense, and that the £22 million-plus that he will save by abolition of the assisted places scheme will benefit all the children of Britain and not only a select few?

One of the key themes that ran through the general election campaign was that—unlike the Conservative party—the Labour party was prepared to defend the interests of the many and not the privileges of the few. The assisted places scheme was one of the prime examples of defending the privileges of the few. There is no doubt in the minds of most reasonable-thinking people that it is far better to spend public money on the needs of 500,000 five, six and seven-year-olds in large classes than to defend the privileged position of 38,000 people in private schools.

Will the Minister confirm that his plans for ending the assisted places scheme make absolutely no provision for meeting the cost of providing maintained education for children who might previously have had an assisted place, and that the potential cost of that commitment is £100 million? Will he also confirm that his plans for delivering a maximum class size of 30 for five, six or seven-year-olds will necessitate employment of another 2,300 teachers, at a cost of £60 million? Will he also confirm that those plans for five, six and seven-year-olds will involve capital expenditure that has been estimated at £100 million? Has he yet worked out how to meet that bill for up to £260 million out of total spending on the assisted places scheme of £120 million—or is he planning on taking advice from the Liberal Democrats on how to spend the same money many times over?

The right hon. Gentleman himself has clearly taken a leaf out of the Liberal Democrats' Treasury book, because he is playing with fantasy figures.

Which one is wrong?

I am afraid that it is not a matter of which one is wrong—all three are wrong. [Interruption.] If the right hon. Gentleman will listen, I shall explain why. I disagree with the £100 million estimated cost of educating in the maintained system young people who will not be able to use the assisted places scheme. I should be very interested to see his figures supporting that contention. As we said very clearly—as the Chancellor of the Exchequer said last week in the Budget—there will be additional capital funding for the assisted places scheme, and we will ensure that our pledge to deliver class sizes of 30 or fewer for every five, six and seven-year-old will be delivered from the money that we will get from phasing out the assisted places scheme. We are not fighting old battles; we are ensuring we can cut class sizes for all five, six and seven-year-olds. We will do it from the money that was used by the previous Government to buy places in the private sector.

What plans he has to increase child care provision in 1998–99. [34896]

In the current year, my Department will allocate an additional £42 million for child care provision, including £10 million for the out-of-school child care initiative—which will provide an additional 20,000 places in the coming year. I am pleased to tell the House that I have allocated £5 million to the Further Education Funding Council, to enable it to provide additional places for child care and creche facilities, so that people can have access to further education.

I welcome that reply. Will the Secretary of State give special consideration to sparsely populated areas, such as mine in Scarborough and Whitby? Those areas have to build infrastructure, and will require resources, which were not forthcoming over the many years of the previous Government.

I am happy to give that assurance. The Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, East (Mr. Howarth), and I will examine ways of expanding child care provision in conjunction with nursery provision for four-year-olds—and later for three-year-olds—including the extension of the present disregard under family credit. That is being increased in June from £60 to £100 and will be extended until the September after a child's 12th birthday.

Does the Secretary of State welcome the establishment just a couple of hours ago of the parliamentary all-party group on child care? Does he agree that affordable, high-quality child care is essential for those who want to move from unemployment to education or training? Is he aware of the grave concerns in the child care industry about the lack of people able to provide adequate child care? What provisions are the Government making to bring more people into running child care establishments and to ensure that they are of good quality?

The critical issue is quality. People must have adequate training. We have been working with voluntary and private organisations, as well as the further education sector, to develop what is sometimes described as the climbing frame of qualifications. The Pre-School Learning Alliance already provides basic training, which can be built on. We are also considering how the one-parent family initiative can help those who are gaining skills in child care as parents to extend those skills to enable them to take on further child care in their community, providing a service for others and a job for themselves.

The provisions in the Budget and my right hon. Friend's announcement this afternoon are welcome. The measures are crucial to encourage lone parents into work. Does my right hon. Friend agree that, if the new deal is to succeed and those lone parents are not to be locked into the low-pay sector, education and training will be equally crucial?

Yes. The £5 million that I have announced this afternoon for the Further Education Funding Council will help to make further education accessible, as will the extension of the disregard, which will be an essential part of the working families tax credit system. Together with the child care provision available for job clubs and other activity with the Employment Service, our initiatives are giving new opportunities to lone parents throughout the country.

If he will make a statement on the special needs of primary schools with a high turnover of pupils. [34897]

Primary schools with a high turnover of pupils clearly face particular problems. The Department's draft guidance on education development plans encourages local education authorities to take account of those needs.

I take it from that answer that my hon. Friend accepts that it is difficult to raise standards in schools in which the whole population turns over every three or four years. Will he consider looking at the formula for delegated budgets to provide additional resources for such schools?

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Teachers in such schools face particular difficulties. It would be irresponsible of the Government to ignore their needs. I assure my hon. Friend that, as we examine the local management of schools and the delegation of budgets, we shall take into account the particular needs of primary schools with a high turnover of pupils.

How does the Minister hope to encourage more people into the teaching profession—which is a laudable objective—when the Government seem intent on weakening the ability of schools to expel the most disruptive pupils? Why does he appear to disagree with Nigel de Gruchy, the general secretary of the National Association of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers, who has said that cases for expulsion should be judged on their merits, not on whether artificial targets will be met?

I will not comment on whether I agree with the general secretary. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] There is a long list of questions on which I disagree with him and it would take far too long to rehearse them to the House.

Will the Minister consider seriously the issue of the clawback of funds when turnover has led to fewer pupils than expected attending a school? At Greystones primary school in my constituency, a clawback of £14,000 has led to a proposed class size of 42. Does he agree that clawback is illogical, because one cannot save money simply because there are slightly fewer pupils? One cannot get rid of a bit of a teacher, so the clawback makes no sense.

Obviously, I am not aware of the precise details of the school to which the hon. Gentleman referred, but I can assure him that we are taking action to introduce a far fairer system of funding for schools. A review is being conducted with our colleagues at the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, to ensure that we have a fair, transparent and understandable system of funding from central to local government and then, as our local management scheme takes effect, from local government to individual schools.

What representations he has received concerning denominational school transport. [34898]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has received a number of representations about transport to denominational schools from hon. Members, parents, and supporters of Church schools.

The Minister will have received representations from Devon because the county council broke a consensus that has existed since 1944 and proposed this year to take away support for denominational school transport. I accept entirely that that is not the Minister's fault and that I could not fairly ask her to give a specific answer today, but I put it to her that the breaking of that consensus will trouble Labour Members every bit as much as it troubles Conservative Members. Will she take the opportunity, in due course, to consider whether we can devise ways of ensuring that no county council can ever do that again?

I have some sympathy with what the hon. Gentleman says, and my Department has been monitoring the situation in Devon carefully, and will continue to do so. I am pleased that the proposal has been deferred for at least 12 months. Local authorities have a statutory duty to take account of denominational preference when constructing school transport policies. It is important that they should continue to do that, within the framework of local decision making. We will continue to monitor the situation not only in Devon but in all local authorities.

Does the Minister agree that availability of free transport is often the key to converting theoretical choice into a practical option for a family? Will she confirm that the Government are opposed to a reduction in the entitlement to school transport and that, if options such as the one proposed in Devon are considered in other local education authorities, the Government are ready not only to monitor the situation but to take action to ensure that no such reduction goes ahead?

The right hon. Gentleman is right in saying that school transport is crucial in families' decisions about where their children should attend school, but it is a bit rich for him to say to the House—

You are in government.

We are in government, and that is why Devon was able to defer its decision to cut school transport. It could defer the decision because it received £13 million extra from the Government. One of the reasons why local authorities have had to cut back on transport in the past 18 years is that, year after year, they have had to deal with reduced budgets. That has now changed, and we expect the attitude to school transport policy to change as well. We will take action if local authorities fall down on their statutory responsibility.

How many responses he has received on the consultation document on millennium volunteers; and if he will make a statement. [34899]

By the end of the consultation period we had received 533 responses to the separate exercises carried out in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The responses to our proposals were highly positive. I will publish a summary of responses to consultation in England at the end of April.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. What does he expect to be distinctive about millennium volunteers? When does he expect the schemes to start?

What will make millennium volunteers distinctive will be the provision of high-quality opportunities across the country for young people to make a sustained commitment to a programme of voluntary activity. That will promote active citizenship to the benefit both of communities and of young volunteers, who will learn, develop personally and receive recognition for their achievement. The first schemes will start, as we promised, in the summer.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that many Conservative Members welcome the millennium volunteers initiative, which follows much of the "Make a Difference" work that we set in hand? Is he also aware, however, of the growing irritation among older people—who make a great contribution to the community and whose needs are not recognised in the new deal—that the Government have little concern for their interests or contributions? I do not want him to think that I have asked that question only because I have reached my own half century.

I strongly suspect that the right hon. Lady may be misleading the House on the last point.

What measures he has introduced to ensure that the training element provided by employers in the new deal programme is of high quality. [34900]

Quality is crucial to all parts of the new deal—one of the key aspects that sets it apart from previous schemes. I thank my hon. Friend for his close and supportive interest in the new deal and assure him that robust arrangements are in place through personal advisers, the Training Agency, the Further Education Funding Council and the Basic Skills Agency to ensure the high quality that the young and long-term unemployed people deserve.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. He will know of the tremendous enthusiasm for the programme, especially among employers. He will also know that there is a history of training and entry-to-work programmes very soon getting bad reputations, especially under the previous Government, who did not resource them well. Will he make every effort, week by week, to keep a check on quality and feedback from young people, because as soon as there is a hint of poor quality or poor opportunity, word spreads quickly in their peer group?

I can certainly give that commitment. I shall be checking weekly, if not more frequently, in partnership with the bodies to which I referred—the Training Agency, the Basic Skills Agency and the Further Education Funding Council. I should add that—and this is most important—I shall be listening to young people's views. Young people will have drawn up with their personal adviser a personal training plan. Companies will have committed themselves by their signatures to a training agreement. We shall listen to the advice of personal advisers and the feedback from young people. I want to send a very clear message that any falling short of the high quality standards that we are demanding in the new deal will not be tolerated. Any provider that does not meet those standards will not be a new deal provider for much longer.

Can the Minister estimate the number of people qualified under the new deal who will enter further and higher education? Will he confirm whether the £5 million that the Secretary of State has announced this afternoon to go into that sector in respect of the new deal will fund the full marginal costs of further and higher education colleges? As the Minister will be aware, there is a considerable financial squeeze on such colleges.

As the new deal is a demand-led and client-centred programme, the number of people who go through the full-time education and training option and will be in further education colleges will depend on the assessment of their needs and on the choices that they make. Ample funds have been allocated within the new deal budget across the lifetime of the Parliament to provide for anticipated levels of demand and to meet the quality standards that I have just said are so important. That will mean something like an extra £400 million across the lifetime of the Parliament for the further education sector—direct provision of full-time education and training places—and about another £300 million for those completing the training part of the environmental task force and voluntary sector options. That is a great investment in the quality of training and education that those young people will receive and it will be a great help to the further education sector.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, a week tomorrow, the new deal in my constituency will be officially launched, and that locally based firms such as Sanyo, Bird's Eye and Shell are fully involved and welcome the insistence on high-quality training that my right hon. Friend has outlined this afternoon, just as the whole constituency—an area that still suffers more than 9 per cent. Unemployment—will welcome the new deal? We are fortunate to have our own delivery unit of the new deal for my constituency. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the same delivery unit will deliver the new deal for the long-term unemployed in a few months' time?

I welcome the work that my hon. Friend and other hon. Members are undertaking to promote the new deal. He is right to bring that new hope and opportunity to young people. It is critical that we obtain the widest possible support from employers, the voluntary sector, environmental groups—indeed, the whole community. I wish him and other hon. Members well with the launch of their new deal locally.

Is not the new deal supposed to help in creating jobs and also to minimise negative effects on other groups? Will he confirm that those two objectives have been proposed to him by the task force as a means of evaluating the new deal? Why have his officials told the Select Committee that they intend to reject those two objectives for the new deal? What do they know about the new deal that he does not?

I am pleased to tell the House that the objectives of the new deal are to help into jobs young and long-term unemployed people, and lone parents and disabled people who wish to work, and to improve those people's prospects of staying and progressing in employment. The objective is also to increase the long-term employability of young and long-term unemployed people, and lone parents and disabled people who wish to work, thereby making a positive contribution to achieving sustainable levels of employment and to a reduction in social exclusion. The bottom line is enhancing young people's employability; getting them skills; getting them into jobs; and tackling the dreadful social division that the country inherited from his party.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind when he gets attacks or so-called assaults from the hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) that he is the man whose second brain has forgotten what his first brain did?

I am pleased to take my hon. Friend's advice.

If he will make a statement on his policy on the closure of rural schools. [34901]

Rural schools are a vital part of their communities. We have decided to give them better protection. All proposals for the closure of a rural school will be called in by the Secretary of State for decision. In considering such proposals, there will be a presumption against closure. This presumption will also apply from September 1999 under the new system of school organisation committees and adjudicators.

As the Minister has just said, this provision will apply only until 1999. Does he recall that his statement, issued just before the countryside march, was labelled "an end to wholesale village school closures"? It is perfectly true that his predecessors managed to close 450 village schools—including many in Cornwall—during a comparatively short period, but there is not a permanent end. If, as it seems, the economic case for closure is his consideration, rather than the educational case, will the Minister confirm that the Secretary of State and the Department will supply the extra resources to LEAs to keep that school open?

We made it clear when the statement was made that the announcement would affect the Secretary of State's role under the existing framework. Under the School Standards and Framework Bill, there will be a new framework for school organisation from September 1999. However, the Secretary of State will lay down guidance as to how the school organisation committees and the adjudicator will exercise their powers. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that that guidance will make it clear that there will be a presumption against closure. The key fact must always be the quality and the standard of education that is offered in the individual schools. We believe that, by harnessing the benefits of new technology—and through the national grid for learning, which will ensure that rural schools go on-line—we can provide the breadth of educational experience that rural schools need to ensure and guarantee a continuing increase in the standards of provision in rural and other schools.

Is my hon. Friend aware that Cheshire has lost large numbers of rural schools precisely because of the argument that there would be so few pupils that the school would not be able to reach the standard required? The very best computer is not a replacement for a teacher in the classroom.

My hon. Friend makes an important point. No fewer than 450 rural primary schools were closed under the previous Government. The key point of the announcement on 28 February was to ensure that there would be a presumption against closure. That does not mean that there will never be a closure of a rural school. It does mean that a strong case will have to be made by the LEA and only in those exceptional circumstances will the presumption against closure be rebutted by the LEA.

Does the Minister agree that, if he had gone on television on 28 February to announce that, from September 1999, his Government were abolishing the right of proposed closures to go to the Secretary of State on appeal—in effect, that is what he has said will happen—the announcement, on the eve of the countryside march, would have had a different effect? Will he confirm that, from September 1999, Members of this House will still be able to make representations on behalf of their constituents to the Secretary of State if rural primary schools are threatened?

It is worth acknowledging that, at the rate of closure under the previous Government, in excess of 40 rural schools would be closed between now and September 1999. In the School Standards and Framework Bill, we are delegating powers to a local level in terms of school organisation procedure. We feel that that is wholly appropriate because those matters are best taken locally. However, they will be taken in line with the guidance provided by the Secretary of State, which will make it clear that there must be a presumption against closure.

How he intends to support the provision of child care in deprived areas. [34902]

The provision of child care in deprived areas depends on parents being able to afford it. Last week, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced the introduction of a new working families tax credit, including a child care tax credit worth up to 70 per cent. of eligible child care costs up to £100 per week for one child and £150 for two children.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, but will he set a time scale for the introduction of child care into deprived areas? Often, when lone parents are employed on low wages, two thirds of the family budget goes on child care.

My hon. Friend makes an extremely important point. For the reason that he gives, we are determined that there should be accessible and affordable child care in every community. The rules that the previous Government drew up for the out-of-school child care initiative effectively discriminated against poor communities by insisting that subsidy for child care places could not be provided for longer than 12 months. That requirement failed to recognise the difficulties that there are in developing and establishing child care provision in areas of disadvantage. We must ensure that potential providers of child care in deprived communities have not only the money but the time to establish themselves, and enough continuity of support to break through into sustainability.

If he will make funds available under the welfare-to-work new deal proposals for the SEAX training centre in Colchester. [34903]

Last year, Essex county council announced that the SEAX centre in Colchester would close on 31 March 1998. There are no proposals for new deal funding to be made available. If the centre had been viable—I understand that a management buy-out is under consideration—it would have had the same opportunity to seek new deal work as any other local provider, but I cannot earmark funds for SEAX in the way that the hon. Gentleman seeks, because that is not the purpose for which Parliament has voted new deal money.

I regard that answer as very unhelpful. Will the Minister confirm that, as of Tuesday next week, several of my constituents will be out of work? For them, it is not so much welfare to work as work to welfare. Will he confirm that it is the view of all political parties on Essex county council that, if the central Government money was there, the SEAX centre would continue? Will he also confirm that, for 20 years, SEAX has been operating within the democratic framework? Why cannot public money from the new deal find its way into the public sector?

I have already explained that, if SEAX were viable, it would be able to bid for new deal money on the same basis as anyone else. Of course it is a matter of enormous concern when anyone faces losing their job.

The Minister makes an effective point. I believe that hon. Members are becoming disheartened by consistent attempts by Liberal Democrats first to agree to the new deal, then not to say where the money will come from, and then to disown policies that they have agreed with as a county council.

I agree with my hon. Friend. He is right about the hope and opportunity that the new deal offers young unemployed and long-term unemployed people, in Essex as elsewhere. He is right about the considerable achievements in the pathfinder areas, and especially about the value of those initial interviews with personal advisers and the fact that young people appreciate that the programme is on their side and really offers them a future.

Can I point out to the Minister how regrettable that closure is? The Conservatives on the county council initially opposed the proposal advanced by the Liberal Democrats—

And Labour.

And by the Labour party. However, we were unable to reverse the decision because of the draconian local government settlement that the Government have inflicted upon the shire counties. If the Government were serious about keeping such projects going, they would not be robbing Essex of the grant to which it is entitled.

The hon. Gentleman seems to have forgotten who was in government when the decision was taken. I can reassure his constituents and others in Essex that, through the new deal and through other Employment Service programmes working with the 70 other training providers in Essex, we shall succeed where the previous Government failed by raising skill standards and getting people into jobs.

What steps he is taking to ensure the welfare of children in independent boarding schools. [34904]

All independent boarding schools are required by statute to safeguard and promote the welfare of their pupils, and are subject to regular inspection by local social services departments. We are currently consulting on the recommendations in the Utting report regarding safeguards for children living away from home. We shall then announce what further steps we shall take.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. In an attempt to minimise the likelihood of further damaged individuals arriving on the Opposition Benches, and following Tuesday night's historic vote to ban caning in private schools, will my hon. Friend join me in expressing concern about the findings of the 1996–97 Office for Standards in Education report, which found that many independent boarding schools have significant weaknesses in relation to pupil accommodation and welfare, and that one quarter of schools do not have sufficient arrangements for checking individuals who have unsupervised access to pupils? Does my hon. Friend agree that parents who are considering sending children to those boarding schools should be made aware of those findings? In considering what future action to take, will he ensure that those matters are investigated properly and adequately?

My hon. Friend raises several important points, some of which are contained within the recommendations of the Utting report. It would be inappropriate for me to say at this stage precisely what our response will be, as public consultation on the recommendations closes tomorrow.

On 1 May last year, the Conservatives won control of Surrey county council by the largest vote in at least 18 years. Will the Minister promise that his Government will not—to borrow a phrase from the Secretary of State's speech yesterday morning—cock a snook at the democratic decision of Surrey county council to build bridges between independent schools and the state sector? With a new system of partnership provision that draws on money from charitable sources and does not use funding that is needed for teachers and primary schools, it will successfully replace the former assisted places scheme.

Less than two hours ago, the hon. Gentleman raised that specific point with me. I offered him the facility of a meeting to discuss the Surrey plan. I said that I would take him through the Government's view and suggest any alterations to the plan that might be necessary in order to meet the Government's requirements. That offer stands, and I am pleased to make it on the record this afternoon. I hope that my word is good enough—even if it is not good enough for the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans), I think it is probably good enough for the hon. Member for Guildford (Mr. St. Aubyn).

What discussions he has held with representatives of the voluntary sector on millennium volunteers. [34905]

Representatives of the voluntary sector have been consulted fully on our proposals for millennium volunteers in separate consultation exercises held in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Is not the willingness of people to volunteer to help others for love and not for money a mark of a decent and socially inclusive society? If social inclusion means anything, all people ought to have the opportunity to be included. Has my hon. Friend, as part of his consultations, been speaking to bodies that represent disabled people? Will he make sure that young disabled people will be able to participate in the scheme?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that working for others in a voluntary capacity is the mark of a civilised, inclusive society. It is essential that disabled people should be able to be millennium volunteers. I much appreciate the positive and practical responses to our consultation that we received from leading disability organisations. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor's announcement last week that people in receipt of incapacity benefit will in future be able to do any amount of voluntary activity removes a major barrier that the benefits system that we inherited has hitherto placed in the way of the social inclusion of disabled people.

Does not the independent sector of education possess many voluntary groups that do a great deal of good work in society? Does the Minister agree that the independent sector of education, as well as the maintained sector, plays a full part in community life? The sort of remarks that have been made from the Labour Benches about the independent sector are unjustified, and he should pay tribute to the role that the independent sector of education has played in the life of this country and in helping people to contribute to the voluntary community, which is so important.

The hon. Gentleman is right—a number of schools in the independent sector, as in the maintained sector, have highly developed programmes to encourage voluntary activity among their pupils and students. We want to see much more of that. I commend, for example, the Changemakers charity, which is dedicated to encouraging voluntary activity in schools. If we are to strengthen the culture of volunteering in our society, it needs to begin in the schools.

After all, the Minister and I both went to the same school—Rugby.

What plans he has to ensure that teachers and parents have full confidence in the inspection of schools. [34906]

As foreshadowed in the "Excellence in Schools" White Paper last summer, the chief inspector has agreed with me a programme of improvement, including a drive for quality, consistency and value for money. One of those proposals is the instigation of the new adjudicator or ombudsman, who will be available to deal with complaints relating to the inspection process.

Most schools recognise that external inspections are an important part of the process for improving schools and raising standards. In a recent visit to a primary school in my Corby constituency, I heard staff expressing concern that, if an inspection is done badly, it can not only lead to bad results of the inspection, but can undermine confidence in the inspection system. Can my right hon. Friend reassure me that the external independent adjudicator announced by Ofsted will genuinely provide a means of redress for schools that feel that they have been treated badly, and that it will provide opportunity for greater fairness and openness in the system of school inspections?

Yes, we are committed to independent inspection and to its part in the driving up of standards, which is so critical to the Government's objectives. I can give the assurances that my hon. Friend seeks. In addition, there will be a new duty on the chief inspector to maintain a list of accredited inspectors so that the teams can be properly monitored and, where there is inadequate inspection, inspectors can be removed from that list.

Is not the single most important thing that the Secretary of State can do to assure parents that schools are being properly inspected to continue giving his full support to Chris Woodhead, the chief inspector, who has done more than any one individual to combat the anti-education doctrines that were so disastrously introduced in the 1960s? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with me also that Mr. Woodhead has shown a remarkable ability to function effectively in different political environments—almost as great an ability as the Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Newport, East (Mr. Howarth)?

All those who seek to join our agenda in driving up standards have my support, just as all those people give their support to us.

If the Secretary of State has so much confidence in the chief inspector of schools, will he explain why he and his colleagues are not in favour of having an annual debate in the House on the chief inspector's annual report?

We are in favour of the Select Committee on Education and Employment doing its job. As we said at some unearthly hour earlier this week, that is the process that we intend to follow.

I hope that the Select Committee will do its job.

My hon. Friend will expect there to be widespread consultation in the normal fashion. Appointments will be made under the procedures adopted within my Department to ensure that there is fairness, that there is no bias and, particularly, that there is independence.

If he will host the Commonwealth Education Ministers conference in summer 2000 in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement on the bid from Brighton and Hove to host the conference. [34907]

The Government have no plans to offer to host the next Conference of Commonwealth Education Ministers in the United Kingdom. Britain will play a full and positive part in the conference wherever the Commonwealth decides that it should be held.

May I remind my hon. Friend that all branches of the education profession are enthusiastically in support of the conference and would deeply appreciate it being held in this country, especially in millennium year? We think that this would send a good message to the Commonwealth and would be a hugely popular decision throughout it. Will my hon. Friend reconsider the question of hosting the conference in the United Kingdom?

The Government have made their commitment to the Commonwealth clear. We demonstrated that in a practical way at a highly successful Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting at Edinburgh in October 1997. We think that we have played our part. There are 54 nations in the Commonwealth, and we think that the chance to host such conferences should be shared equally.

As a joint chairman of the parliamentary side of the Council for Education in the Commonwealth, may I ask the Minister to accept from me that his answer is extremely disappointing? Will he reconsider it in the light of the high-powered representations that he has received from the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals and others, including Professor Tim Brighouse, that there is a strong wish to bring the conference to the United Kingdom after 41 years? I am sure that lateral thinking will secure adequate funding. Will the Minister remember that, even if Brighton or Daventry are not acceptable, there are some strong and powerful higher education claims round Sheffield, which might just tip the balance?

I am always interested in the hon. Gentleman's lateral thinking, especially on questions of funding. Perhaps we could have a cup of tea to discuss it later.

What progress is being made in involving employers in the new deal for the young unemployed. [34908]

The new deal is making good progress on employer involvement. Already, we have signed 2,600 new deal employer agreements, 46 of which are with leading national employers.

My right hon. Friend will be aware of some concern in Exeter and east Devon at the time that it has taken to find an appropriate local private sector lead for the new deal. Therefore, I welcome my hon. Friend's announcement today that a company has been appointed, but can he assure me that it will build bridges with the local voluntary, private and statutory sectors to ensure that the new deal is a success in Exeter and east Devon?

The company which has been appointed, Action for Employment Ltd., is already the lead private sector body on the South Humber new deal delivery unit, where experience shows that it invests considerable time in building precisely those contacts which are so important. One of the criteria against which it was selected, as were other private sector leads, was its proposals for working in partnership with others in the local community, as is so crucial to the success of the new deal.

As the new deal is funded by the one-off windfall tax, how will it be funded once that money is used up? When the minimum wage is introduced, with the resulting shakeout in employment with people being made unemployed, how will the Government make sufficient resources available to meet the costs of all those extra unemployed people so that they, too, can take advantage of the new deal?

The new deal is in a much more fortunate position than most Government programmes in having assured funding for the whole of the Parliament, and greater flexibility to deploy funds from one year to the next, as is necessary to deliver the programme with the quality and efficiency which we require. As was clear from the Budget, the Government are about making work pay, and the minimum wage will help with that, just as it will help many other poor people make the transition from welfare to work.

I beg to move amendment No. 14, in page 30, line 35, leave out from 'for' to end of line 43 and insert

'each of the regions of Wales.

(2) These regions shall be the same as the electoral regions at the last ordinary election.'.

With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 242, in page 30, line 36, leave out from 'to' to end of line and insert

'which the Assembly must have regard when deciding on matters affecting North Wales.'.

'which the Assembly must have regard when deciding on matters affecting the region.'.

'(aa) Mid Wales, and

(ab) West Wales, and'.

This will be a relatively short debate because the guillotine falls at 6 o'clock. That reinforces our request for an extra day to debate the many issues necessary to ensure that the Bill is improved. It is a great shame that we have only 45 minutes in which to debate two groups of amendments.

Amendments Nos. 242 and 243 would require the assembly to have regard to the decisions of regional Committees when taking decisions affecting the regions. In Committee, we discussed amendments that would have allowed the assembly to delegate functions to the regional Committees. I still believe that that is the best way to proceed if we are to allow some decisions to be taken locally, representing the interests and needs of local people.

"The Regional Committees are designed to enable the regions to feed back specific advice to the Welsh assembly when it makes its decisions."— [Official Report, 2 February 1998; Vol. 305, c. 801.]

"will ensure that the views of the different regions of Wales can be heard."

What would the hon. Gentleman do about the appointment to regional Committees of Members of the Assembly in the top-up areas? Would he have some Members trying to sit on two Committees, or allow the assembly to vote in favour of those Members sitting on the regional Committees?