How he proposes to improve the promotion of self-employment through the new deal. [88964]

We are promoting the self-employment option through personal advisers. By the end of May, 1,800 young unemployed people had started on new deal business courses, 800 had started test trading and more than 100 were independently running their own businesses. The very best promotion for the new deal self-employment option is the success of young people themselves, such as Mark Venning in Plymouth, who has not only started his own business through the new deal, but is now poised to recruit his first new deal employee.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Is he aware that my hon. Friends in north Kent and I have carried out an inquiry into the operation of the new deal in our area? Generally, the response from those involved has been positive and enthusiastic. However, the concern is—it is certainly the perception—that the potential for self-employment has not been fully exploited. In building on the success of the new deal, and in developing the new ONE service, will he give the House an assurance that he will consult organisations such as the Prince's Trust, to ensure that young people with a good business idea can use their energies, talents and abilities to move out of unemployment and into self-employment?

I congratulate my hon. Friends on their work locally, which builds on the extensive involvement of hon. Members in the new deal. That has been something of an innovation, and has greatly contributed to the success of the programme. We are working closely with the Prince's Trust Business, and I was pleased recently to announce, with the support of all parties in the House, an extra £50 million of matched funding, which should enable an additional 30,000 young people to start their own businesses over the next five years. A significant proportion of those 30,000 will be new deal young unemployed people.

The Minister's statement is encouraging for those who have taken advantage of new deal opportunities. Does he agree with me and many colleagues present that there are individuals throughout our constituencies who did not achieve much academically at school, but who after leaving school have, with initiative and support, become successful in self-employment? Does he further agree that organisations such as the local economic development enterprise groups in Northern Ireland, which encourage new business start-ups, could provide support; and that, through the new deal, placements could be found for business start-up in such organisations?

Yes, I do agree. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support for the programme, which, if it can help to tackle the historically high unemployment in his constituency and in neighbouring areas, will make a big contribution to overcoming the sectarian divisions that must be overcome if we are to make a success of the peace process, which we all want. I commend the efforts of start-up bodies, the Employment Service in Northern Ireland and local businesses, which are doing their bit in a great partnership effort to give new hope to young people who have had a rough start in life.

My right hon. Friend has recently announced continuous improvement targets for next year of 6 per cent. to boost the number of young people going into unsubsidised and subsidised jobs. They are good, fair targets. Will he confirm whether similar improvement targets have been set for the self-employment option, given its importance within the new deal programme? If not, will he consider doing so?

Yes, indeed. It is actually a 6 percentage point improvement, which could mean an increase of as much as a third in some of the poorly performing units of delivery, and an increase of about 8 per cent. even in the best performing units. People who are securing self-employment through the new deal self-employment option are included in those targets.

We welcome any chance for new deal recruits to end up working for themselves, especially as most of them have had little chance to end up working for anyone else. On the right hon. Gentleman's own admission, more than 16,000 recruits have gone back on benefits, almost 40,000 have disappeared to destinations unknown, and three quarters have failed to find employment. The Business Services Association, which started by supporting the scheme, says that the new deal has not proved effective at matching candidates to job vacancies. What guarantee can the right hon. Gentleman give the House that his latest scheme will not be as big a failure as his previous botched efforts?

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his appointment to the Front-Bench team. It is the first opportunity I have had so to do—[Interruption.]—although my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) says that the hon. Gentleman is obviously still in the gateway stage.

What steps he is taking to improve the level of communication and co-operation between schools in the same locality. [88965]

We regard better communication and co-operation between schools and particularly the dissemination of good practice as a vital part of our drive to raise standards in schools. Among the Government's initiatives are the beacon schools initiative, specialist school schemes, "Excellence in Cities", education action zones and a range of other ideas to that end.

I welcome the Administration's announcements over the past two years, but as my hon. Friend will be aware, we have a legacy of poor co-operation between schools which we inherited from the former Administration. Will he look at innovative supply chain techniques in business and apply them to the relationships from the earliest school—pre-school—to universities? Will he come to my constituency of Huddersfield, where, led by the further education sector, we have achieved amazing results in improving quality, from pre-school to the local university?

I accept what my hon. Friend says about the achievements in Huddersfield. May I draw attention to the early-years development schemes, our development of school organisation committees, and the post-16 White Paper that was published last week, all of which are designed to generate co-operation between all aspects of education and to achieve what he mentions?

I entirely endorse the philosophy that local schools should co-operate. On schools in the Vale of York area, which is now within the city of York, there was excellent co-operation at the level of North Yorkshire county council, which—I say it for the House's benefit—is Conservative controlled. I regret that, since it has had its own Labour-controlled local education authority, the city of York has not even developed a long-term education strategy to deal with the real problem of surplus places in the town. What will the Government do to correct that matter?

I have met delegates from the city of York and the local Members of Parliament to discuss those issues. The educational development plans focus precisely on the means of developing co-operation to address those issues; but it is a bit rich of Conservatives, who positively promoted division between schools when in government, to make criticisms on that front. We are trying to build co-operation.

What assessment he has made of the effects of pupil mobility on standards in schools. [88966]

We are supporting a research project into pupil mobility and its effect on schools, conducted by the migration research unit at University College, London. We expect preliminary results from the project to be available this month. We hope that the outcomes will provide more information on the issue of pupil mobility and the impact on standards in schools. We will keep the House informed of progress.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. May I give him an example from a primary school in my constituency which highlights the problem? I take the most recent year group to leave that school. During its four-year passage through the school, there were 123 pupils, yet of that number, only 40 were on the roll for the duration of those four years—a 67 per cent. mobility rate. A high proportion of those transient pupils suffer serious under-achievement, given the number who are on records of support, and it is much harder for the school to teach the 40 regulars, if I may call them that.

My hon. Friend is entirely right. The answer to his question is yes, we shall consider that, once we have evaluated the research. The fact is that mobility is very high in many surprising places: in seaside resorts, such as those in his own constituency; in inner-city areas, where there has been surprisingly high mobility; in places near armed forces, such as schools in Catterick; and in travellers' areas, migration areas, and rural inland areas. We have to understand pupil mobility far better, and then decide how to target resources so that they make a difference.

What support has been made available to schools to help them reduce the number of pupils who are excluded. [88967]

In 1999–2000, £57.4 million has been made available through the standards fund to help local education authorities and schools reduce levels of truancy and exclusion and move towards a full timetable for those out of school. Overall, £500 million will be made available over three years. Other measures to tackle truancy and exclusion include requiring authorities to set targets to reduce truancy and exclusion levels by one third by 2002, and, earlier this week, issuing new integrated guidance, "Social Inclusion; Pupil Support".

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is she aware of the organisation Place to Be, which provides specialist counselling and therapy-based services in schools in areas such as Medway to assist children and their families when they are in periods of difficulty? That counselling is an enormous help to those families, and perhaps prevents them from going on to use other health services and waiting a long time. Additionally, its proactive approach means that many pupils who might face exclusion, either permanently or temporarily, may avoid doing so. Will she find out more about Place to Be, and try to ensure that thousands of other children benefit from that vital service?

I share with my hon. Friend the determination to take preventive action, so that we may stop youngsters being excluded. As he well knows, the purpose of the Place to Be project is to prevent long-term mental health difficulties in primary-aged children who may be at risk of such difficulties. I was delighted that some of the almost £500,000 that has been provided to Medway, where my hon. Friend's constituency is to be found, is being used to support Place to Be. My hon. Friend may be interested to know that Place to Be is also doing some work in one of the education action zones. We shall evaluate the project, as that is one of the grant conditions. However, after careful evaluation of the project, if it is proved to be effective, we shall of course be delighted to help to support it operating elsewhere.

Yesterday, the Education and Employment Committee published the Government's response to our report on highly able children, some of whom may also be at risk of exclusion if the maintained sector cannot meet their very particular needs. A nine-year-old girl in my constituency has not found in the maintained sector the education that she needs, and, this autumn, will be going to a local independent school. Will the Minister explain to the House why that girl and her family have to rely solely on charitable support to achieve the education that she needs, and why the Government will deny power to the local education authority to fund that provision?

The Government welcome the Select Committee report on the education of highly able children. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Government have launched a policy—the most wide-ranging such policy ever developed in the lifetime of the English education service—to support highly able children throughout the school system. His constituents will always have the choice of whether to access the independent sector to educate their children.

My hon. Friend will be aware of the unfortunate circumstances surrounding the exclusion—from the Nelson Thomlinson school, in Cumbria—of a child from my constituency. In the light of that case—which I think has national significance—why cannot we now have a complete review of the whole policy? There was an injustice in that case, and we must find some way of ensuring that similar injustices do not occur in future.

I recall the case to which my hon. Friend refers. We have had lengthy correspondence on it and I very much hope that it has been resolved. We have a good system for dealing with exclusions and disputes between parents and schools. It is inevitable that the relationships between parents and schools will occasionally break down. Sometimes the victims are the children, whose education is disrupted. I hope that in the case to which my hon. Friend referred those concerned took every possible course of action to bring about a speedy resolution—but I entirely take his point. If the system needs changing to avoid children being out of school for a long period, we shall be happy to learn from that example and review the situation when we review our policy.

We all want to ensure that all children are valued and are given access to education so that they can take advantage of the opportunities that it offers them. Does the Minister accept that many teachers are very concerned about the impact that the Government's insistence on targets for reducing exclusion could have in the classroom? Many feel that to reach the targets pupils will be kept in the classroom against the better judgment of the school and against their own interests and those of others in the school—or will the Government fiddle the figures to reach their target, as we have already seen may be happening on the literacy and numeracy targets?

I am left wondering whether the hon. Lady knows what exclusion means. Under the Conservative Government it meant excluding a child from full-time education and often providing them with as little as two hours' education a week. Part of the money that we have made available this year will be used to provide full-time education for the first time for those excluded from school. I hope that all hon. Members share our wish for children not to be excluded from school.

How many (a) primary schools and (b) secondary schools have been taken out of the special measures category since the beginning of the current academic year. [88968]

I am pleased to be able to announce that last term, for the first time, the number of schools going into special measures was exceeded by the number coming out. There were 135 entering special measures and 149 coining out, of which 109 were primary schools, 24 were secondary and 16 were special schools. By the end of this term a further 40 schools will have come out of special measures.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his response and I congratulate the Government on their progress towards achieving their objective of making every school in this country a good school. Is my right hon. Friend aware that Milefield primary school in Grimethorpe in my constituency has recently been taken out of the special measures category? Having visited Grimethorpe, he will be aware of the hardships that it has suffered in recent years, particularly in 1993 when the local pit was deliberately closed as an act of political spite, not economic necessity, by the previous Government. Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating everyone connected with Milefield school, including the headmistress, Judith Hurst, the governors, the staff, the parents and particularly the children, on their recent achievement?

We all appear to be able to rejoice at Milefield school coming out of special measures in February. I congratulate all who have made that possible, including the head, the teachers and the parents. When I visited Grimethorpe last Friday, I was deeply impressed by the spirit of self-help and regeneration in the community, and by the older and younger people who were making that possible. It is with that spirit of self-help that the devastation caused by the previous Government will be set aside.

What assessment he has made of the level of support from the voluntary sector for the early learning goals. [88969]

The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority recently published its report which analyses responses to the review of desirable learning outcomes. This shows that over 95 per cent. of respondents from across the range of sectors support the aims of the proposed early learning goals. This includes support from the voluntary sector, at 95 per cent.

Does my hon. Friend agree with the Ofsted report, which concluded that children do not suffer emotionally by being encouraged to achieve early learning goals, such as counting to 10 and learning the alphabet? I am sure that most parents would agree with that.

We know from the response to our consultation that most parents do agree with that. It is outrageous to suggest that children who are almost six should not be able to feel comfortable with early numbers and early literacy achievements. We will pursue those early learning goals as a way of raising standards throughout the education system.

The Minister's reply notwithstanding, can she explain to the House why, despite the large positive response to which she referred, the Early Childhood Education Forum—which represents nearly every organisation involved in early-years education across the country—has described the proposals as a mess and a muddle? The forum said that the goals were far too prescriptive and that there would be an early introduction of formal education which, as evidence from other countries in Europe suggests, is the wrong approach. As an example, can the Minister explain why she believes it right to have it as a goal that children by the age of six should learn to sit still, rather than that they should be able to jump on to and off a log?

I had better engage the hon. Gentleman about falling off logs—[Interruption]—and sooner rather than later. He was with me when the Select Committee visited Switzerland, one of the countries which engages in a more structured and rigorous approach to early-years education. It is not an issue of choosing between play and learning; nor is it an issue of over-formalising education. We are attempting to ensure—I would want the hon. Gentleman's support—that children at this early stage of their development get those skills that we know are necessary for effective learning. To ensure that that happens, we need to have the structure and rigour of a foundation stage and early learning goals.

Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating Shrewsbury sixth form college on the development of the new learning centre at the heart of the town, which will be open to all, young and old, and which will be completed in September? What help is available from the Government for encouraging more community learning schemes?

A community learning fund will be available to colleges such as the one my hon. Friend described, from which they can get support for the sort of schemes that he would wish to make progress.

The Minister cannot simply cast aside the growing concerns about the increasing formalisation of education for children at a very young age and the increasing pressure being put on them by having to go to primary school at an earlier age and by the early learning outcomes. Is she aware of the article by Dr. Cousins, an adviser to the United Nations on early-years education, who said:

"The growing use of 'end-product activities' and 'learning outcomes' risked switching many children off learning by the age of five"?

That really takes the biscuit. The increase in the number of children going into reception classes was entirely due to the nursery voucher scheme introduced by the previous Government. I wonder whether the hon. Lady really thinks it wrong for her own children, by the time they are five, almost six, to be able to count to 10, to know the alphabet, to recognise the M on a McDonald's sign and to be able to deal with simple words. If she wants that for her own children, is it not good enough for other children? Is it not about time that Conservative Members started to show some concern for the three quarters of all four-year-olds currently experiencing their nursery education in the maintained sector?

What support has been given to specialist schools to enable them to increase their links with the community. [88971]

The criteria for specialist school applicants provide clear guidance on their community role. From September, we will make available additional funding of up to £20,000 a year to support the development of links with other primary and secondary schools and the wider community.

I join my hon. Friend in welcoming the expansion of the specialist schools programme, which includes Plessington high school in my constituency. Is not that evidence of the Government delivering on diversity, just as they are delivering on early years and on class sizes? What evidence is there of successful achievement by pupils in the specialist schools?

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments and congratulate Plessington on being designated a specialist school. It is indeed an example of the Government modernising the comprehensive principle. There were 200 specialist schools when we took office and we have found additional resources so that there will be 800—one in four secondary schools—by 2002. We have ensured that they share their resources and expertise with other secondary and primary schools in the area so that we can raise standards for all children, not only a few. I know that all hon. Members will welcome that.

The former Lytham St. Anne's high school in my constituency has taken on the specialist role of a technology college, but unfortunately it faces problems with its second round funding application. It was led to believe that £100 per capita would be available in the second phase, but it is now affected by a new policy that appears to impose a cap. Will the Minister assure me that an official from her Department will make early contact with the headmaster, Mr. Michael Payne, to review the situation and get a first-hand briefing on the problem?

There are no new criteria. The financial arrangements for the second round were made clear some time ago. The specialist schools receive considerable extra money. There is matched funding of £100,000 for capital work and up to an additional £100,000 to provide for revenue work both for the schools' own students and for others. I have every confidence that the school in the right hon. Gentleman's constituency will use the money to good effect to raise standards for its students and those in the neighbouring schools.

Will my hon. Friend investigate the unwillingness of the Conservative-controlled Cambridgeshire local education authority to match the Government's standards fund to provide literacy classes for parents in my constituency? Those parents will miss out on a valuable source of funding that the Government want to use to raise standards.

I share my hon. Friend's concern about that. In the drive to raise literacy standards for children, it is just as important to work with their parents. Much of the money made available by the Government for the literacy strategy should be taken up locally, and I very much regret the action of the Cambridgeshire authority. If it had decided to passport the money that the Government have made available for schools, it would not have had to make the decision that it has made.

Given that specialist schools involve a measure of selection, will the Minister take this opportunity to say whether the Government still believe the assurance given by the Secretary of State to the constituents of the hon. Member for Wirral, South (Mr. Chapman) in the by-election there in 1997? That assurance was given in a Labour publication and was headed "Grammars are safe with Labour". The Secretary of State said:

"There's no threat to the continuance of the grammar schools or to their ethos or their quality. I'm very keen to level up."

I look forward to the day when the hon. Gentleman asks a question that does not refer to the 161 grammar schools, but is about the 24,000 other schools that make up the rest of the English state system. My right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State have made the Government's policy quite clear, both before and since the election. They have said that the decision about whether to change the admissions arrangements for grammar schools, in the Wirral and elsewhere, will lie in the hands of parents. The House knows that the last time that many grammar schools closed was under Baroness Thatcher. She did not allow parents to make that decision, but took it herself, in conjunction with local authorities. I should have thought that, on such important decisions, the House would welcome the fact that we are asking those whose lives will most be affected.

What representations he has received from schools regarding the literacy hour. [88973]

The latest survey shows that 90 per cent. of head teachers welcome the literacy hour and find it extremely valuable and useful in transforming the life chances of children. This week, Ofsted said that the project was an important catalyst in the majority of schools in tackling deep-seated problems with literacy. We are very pleased that the literacy hour is making such a difference. We shall go forward to ensure that, despite the legacy that we inherited, our children will be able to read, write and add up at the age of 11.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that comprehensive answer. He will be interested to know that I recently visited St. Edward's primary school in Boston Spa in my constituency, which achieves high standards. Its head teacher, Mark Brennan, was especially keen to stress how the literacy hour will serve to drive up standards further. Several other head teachers in my constituency have said the same, so it is clear that the literacy hour is an outstanding success. Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to praise the teachers and the non-teaching assistants who have worked so hard to deliver this good news story for us all?

Yes, I shall take this opportunity to do just that, with cross-party support. We thank Lord Putnam, Lloyds TSB and all the others who have worked so hard on the national awards. We also greatly appreciate the fact that, at 7 pm on BBC1 this Sunday, the BBC will publicise the excellence of teachers and the good work that is being done. We can all celebrate what is happening in our classrooms. For the excellent work of our teachers and non-teaching staff we say, "Thank you."

There are many thousands of good teachers in our schools, and improvements in the attainment of literacy standards are welcome. However, how can teachers take seriously the Secretary of State's protestations about the importance that he attaches to their professional status when his Department is issuing guidance that tells them how to use every 10 minutes of the literacy hour? Should he not concentrate on setting standards and targets rather than trying to tell teachers how to teach? If he really believes in the professional status of teachers, should he not be leaving teaching to those best qualified to do it?

One section of the right hon. Gentleman's party has just denounced targets, and he welcomes targets but not the means by which to reach them. We need a strategy that provides a framework and the resources to back it up, and we have provided £55 million. We need teacher training to make the strategy achievable, and added support for pupils, which youngsters themselves have welcomed, for activities which, in the past, only the rich could afford in the Easter holidays or at weekend. We also need to ensure that teachers have the professional judgment to make appropriate adjustments on the principle of inverse proportion to success. Where intervention is not needed, we will stay out, but where it is needed, we will intervene.

Does the Secretary of State recognise the sad irony of our having to address basic literacy as we approach the 21st century when the problem had been identified by Parliament at the end of the 19th century? Children enjoy the literacy hour in my constituency, but does the Secretary of State recognise that both for children with high ability whose reading standards are high and for those who may struggle with reading, some flexibility may be needed in the hour?

As part of our development for gifted children and our extension of what is available in the school, rather than outside the neighbourhood, we shall issue specific guidance. This week's Ofsted report said that struggling children, and the average, had benefited greatly from the structure that we have provided. The additional boost to classes had transformed their life chances, and not simply those of the children who were coasting or doing well. Our strategy is helping those who, in the past, would simply have been abandoned to entering adulthood without being able to read and write properly and who would then have formed the cohort so graphically identified by the Moser report a few months ago.

Is it not perfectly obvious that one way in which to assess the efficiency and effect of the literacy hour, and to drive up standards, would be to publish the results of tests held at age seven? Does the Secretary of State recall his feeble answer in yesterday's education debate when I put it to him that he had been hurt by criticism that too much bureaucracy was being placed on schools? Can he explain how it would add to the bureaucracy affecting schools if local education authorities and his Department ensured that those results were published?

I answered the hon. Gentleman's question last night. It is a pity that he either did not hear me, or cannot remember it.

I have just read it in Hansard.

I am pleased that the literacy hour has enabled the hon. Gentleman to look up the answer this morning. My answer remains the same. He cannot in one breath ask us to relieve pressure, reduce bureaucracy and spend less on centralised collection, collation and publication of data, while in the next breath demand the opposite.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that we can build on the excellent progress that schools are making on literacy and numeracy by using electronic conferencing and the information communication technology that the Government are putting into schools for professional development of teachers?

The database that is being compiled and the way in which the standards site is now working are enabling people to spread best practice, and to share what they have found to work well—rather than merely what is offered by the framework. That also provides them with the wherewithal to support integrated learning systems, which are most important for underachievers. I am extremely pleased that the Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Norwich, South (Mr. Clarke), is taking forward the development of the national grid for learning; a concept that did not even exist as a twinkle in the eye of the Conservatives—never mind the £1 billion that we are spending on it.

How many schools have been designated specialist schools since May 1997. [88974]

Since May 1997, 196 schools have been designated, bringing the total to more than 400. That is a considerable achievement and puts us on course to reach our target of 800 by 2003.

I thank my hon. Friend for that most satisfactory reply. In my Dartford constituency, there are three highly popular and successful specialist colleges: Dartford grammar school—a language college; Dartford West school for girls—a technology college; and the Leigh city technology college. Does my hon. Friend agree that a sports college in Dartford would complete the learning community, and would add to genuine choice and diversity for parents in my constituency?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on taking every opportunity to push the cause of his constituency. There are nine specialist schools in his county. A sports college would complete the set; our vision is that there should be several schools of each specialism in every local authority area. I look forward to receiving applications for specialist sports status, but I know that my hon. Friend would not want me to prejudge such applications.

If he will make a statement on the progress of the new deal for disabled people. [88975]

The new deal for disabled people, currently being piloted, is making good progress. Although the journey towards work will take many months for many in that client group, I am pleased to report that, by the end of May, a total of 472 people had already been placed in jobs.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Does she agree that this is the ideal time for employers in large, medium and small companies to review their recruitment, and to take advantage of the benefits to their companies of employing people with disabilities? I am holding discussions with employers in my constituency. What is my hon. Friend doing to encourage employers, nationally, to seize that opportunity?

We are working with many employers so that they can recruit from the widest possible pool of talent, including people with disabilities. For example, in Manchester, where we are running a disabled person pilot, Centrica has employed 50 people with disabilities, and carers. B and Q is another large employer, which has put disability in the mainstream, in respect both of employment and the supply of goods and services. In the Thurso scheme, we are working with employers; 30 people are now in work, who were—between them—unemployed for a total of 194 years. One third of those people had been unemployed for more than nine years and some of them had been unemployed for more than 20 years. That example demonstrates the importance of the scheme for getting disabled people into work.

I add the congratulations of Liberal Democrat Members to the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) on his position on the Opposition Front Bench. I am not sure whether he is in the gateway period, but, given the rather high staff turnover in the Conservative education team, perhaps his job is not too long term.

We are being extremely careful in rolling out the new deal for disabled people to ensure that we find out what works before there is a national roll-out. It is a complex area of policy development, given the broad spectrum of disabilities with which we are coping and the real barriers to employment faced by many disabled people. We shall review that benchmark at an appropriate time, but I am sure that the hon. Gentleman agrees that it would be wrong to set inappropriate targets without learning what works.

I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware of the concerns of a number of disabled people: that they will be called in for interview; that they may be unable to gain access to the building; that the adviser will be insensitive to their needs; and that they may be placed in a job that they cannot do. What measures is she taking to ensure that such concerns are properly addressed?

The new deal for disabled people is a voluntary programme. So far, we have managed to engage more than 3,000 people in the programme following their first interviews, and nearly 2,000 are implementing a focused employment action plan.

It is common ground in the House that the employment of persons with disabilities requires a good deal of care, sensitivity and, indeed, expense. In the light of what the Minister has said, will she confirm that all personal advisers will have expertise, or access to it, in regard to the particular disabilities—or complex of disabilities—of people seeking employment? Does she share the view of the disability charities that the balance between expenditure on the new deal for the disabled and the new deal for young people may require some re-examination?

First, let me welcome the hon. Gentleman to the Front Bench. I think that this is the first occasion on which I have had the pleasure of engaging him in debate on disability rights, but I welcome him back to the Front Bench—although nowadays it is the Opposition Front Bench.

indicated dissent

Let me tell the hon. Lady that I consider this to be one of the most exciting, innovative initiatives that we have launched. It gives disabled people opportunities, and it is not a subject for cheap gibes.

What steps his Department is taking to ensure that people receiving jobseeker's allowance meet their responsibilities of looking for work and improving their employability. [88977]

Everyone receiving the jobseeker's allowance signs an agreement on the steps that they will take to find a job. That is monitored fortnightly by the Employment Service. If people do not meet their responsibilities to be available for work and look for jobs, they can lose their benefits, but the overwhelming majority want jobs—and, under the present Government, more and more are obtaining jobs.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer, and commend his efforts to encourage people to find work. May I put it to him, however, that one of the barriers confronting unemployed people who are trying to improve their employability is the fact that so many of the training funds that are available are still focused on people who are already in work, or on employers and their new recruits, rather than on those who are out of work? That strategy is clearly inappropriate in areas of high unemployment such as my constituency. What does my right hon. Friend intend to do about this serious problem?

As we develop the new deal and implement the continuous improvement strategy, we shall involve employers to a greater extent in pre-employment training programmes. Training that is detached from workplace experience is far less effective than training in conjunction with a job or an opportunity for work experience. The evidence from the new deal shows that, as does all the evidence and evaluation of training for work. Employers such as Stagecoach who operate pre-employment training through the new deal are both finding a ready source of good recruits and helping many people who had given up on the prospect of getting a job back into the workplace.

What estimate he has made of the number of new jobs created by utility companies since 1 May 1997. [88978]

The number of employee jobs in the electricity, gas, water supply and telecommunications industries in Great Britain increased by 2,000 to 342,000 between March 1997 and March 1999.

I am grateful to the Minister for those figures, but I wonder what work his Department has done to monitor which is more successful in creating real jobs more cost effectively: the utility companies or the new deal. May I refer him to an example from my own constituency? A local electricity company has so far created 500 new jobs in building a new gas-fired power station, despite the Government's moratorium on gas-fired power stations. Half of those 500 new jobs are guaranteed to employ local people, yet, according to the last count, only 67 new jobs have been created under the new deal in the whole of West Sussex. Which is the more effective creator of new jobs?

Of course businesses generate jobs. The task of the new deal is to equip people with the skills to fill those vacancies. Of the net increase of 2,000 jobs in the utilities industries that I just mentioned, 230 are new-deal subsidised, and there will be many more unsubsidised jobs in the total. As for the record of the new deal in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, he might like to pay tribute to the efforts of local people, who have secured a 65 per cent. reduction in long-term youth unemployment in his area. That is testimony to the success of the new deal and the way in which it works in partnership with utilities and other businesses.

If he will make a statement on the average class size for children aged seven to 11 years in Leicestershire. [88979]

In Leicestershire, the average primary class has fallen from 26.9 to 26.7 between January 1998 and January 1999. The key stage 1 average has fallen to 25.3 compared to 25.8 last year, and key stage 2 classes average 28.0 compared to 27.8 last year. The number of pupils in primary classes of more than 30 has also fallen, from 14,984 to 14,551.

It is therefore obvious that class sizes are going up for those aged between seven and 11. It is said:

"the rhetoric is of much greater funding but all the announcements of extra government money for education are meaningless to us in Leicestershire … we do not have enough money to pay for the teachers we need or to improve the learning environment."

"It is not convincing for this government…to blame the Local Authority…The SSA is fundamentally inequitable."

"Why should a child at school in Leicestershire have so much less money spent on her or his education than a child living elsewhere"—

I am glad that the hon. Gentleman invites me to address the question of Leicestershire. The county's LEA received almost £1.5 million this year to fund 57 extra teachers and build six extra classrooms to enable it to reduce infant class sizes. The funding that we are providing will enable the LEA to reduce the number of infant pupils in large classes from 3,146 in September 1998 to 2,630 in September 1999. The LEA has said that it will implement the policy in full by September 2000.

I welcome the figures that the Minister has announced today. The hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan), who, before the election, was opposed to reducing class sizes, has been heard in the House on many occasions denigrating the work that has been done. However, will the Minister take seriously the hon. Gentleman's point about the standard spending assessment and Leicestershire's funding? We have a double problem in that not only is the SSA less than those in other parts of the country—I am sure that the difference will be made up in the coming years—but there is a shortfall of £1.5 million that the LEA has received from the Department but not passed to local schools. Will the Minister ensure that, in future, moneys provided by the Department to the LEA go to schools to ensure that targets are met?

I take very seriously representations on SSAs because they concern many issues that have been raised in Leicestershire and other parts of the country. I take even more seriously the issue that my hon. Friend mentioned about passporting the money. That is why, about 10 days ago, we published data setting out exactly what every local authority is doing, and that will enable a proper assessment to be made.