If he will make a statement on progress on the draft School Transport Bill. [181592]

I begin by congratulating the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Collins) on his promotion. In politics, I never like to say, "I told you so", but when the Opposition tried to join the portfolios, one or two of us argued that the wheels would come unstuck. I am delighted that the Leader of the Opposition in his wisdom has acknowledged that and appointed the hon. Gentleman.

I thank the Secretary of State for his answer. Although there is widespread support for the Bill's overall objectives, does he realise that there is widespread opposition to the specific proposal to end the automatic right to free school transport? In the south-west alone, 86,000 pupils have free transport and there is alarm about the implications of such provision becoming a discretionary rather than a mandatory duty for local authorities. Given the widespread opposition to that, will the right hon. Gentleman withdraw the Bill and find another way of achieving its general objectives?

No, I will not. It is a draft Bill, which has yet to be introduced and cannot I her More be withdrawn. I know about the massive Liberal Democrat mudslinging campaign on the Bill—it is based on no substance. It is extraordinary that the Liberal Democrats oppose a measure that liberates local education authorities to decide what do only if they wish to do so—I thought that the Liberal Democrats would support that. I am surprised that a party that purports to be green opposes a measure that is designed to reduce the school run and traffic. The attitude of Liberal Democrats is extraordinary. Perhaps it is worth noting that Liberal Democrats in local government—like Conservatives in local government—strongly support the Bill.

The House should welcome measures that introduce a range of different ways to get children safely to school. I want to focus on safety. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that the methods of transport chosen in each local area fulfil the highest safety standards to avoid the sort of accident that sadly occurred in my constituency, where a child was seriously injured? Will he ensure that mechanisms monitor and secure the highest safety standards for all our children?

My hon. Friend is correct. We are introducing the Bill precisely to find better ways to transport children to school. My hon. Friend is right that safety must be the paramount consideration for young children who travel, and it will be a central element of any scheme that we operate. I know about her work on the subject and I pay tribute to her.

I have every confidence in the good sense of those at local level to make the right decisions when the time comes. However, given the hazards to children, especially those who have to walk to school in rural areas, will the Secretary of State try to facilitate parents whose children do not qualify for free transport? Will he afford them an opportunity to pay for their children's transport on the school bus that passes their homes?

The hon. Gentleman makes his point clearly. We are introducing the Bill precisely to give local authorities the flexibility, after consultation, to make the sort of judgment that he suggests. We want to give local authorities the right to weigh up safety issues, examine travel patterns and form a view. That is why the Local Government Association—Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Labour members—said, "Thank goodness; here is a proposal to try to make some progress." The rubbish-mongering of Conservative and Liberal Democrat Front-Bench Members is extraordinary. They are essentially telling untruths about the proposals.

The Government are a great advocate for extending parental choice but under existing rules and regulations, the only genuine choice is for parents who have the use of a car to transport their children to school. Is it one of the draft Bill's objectives to extend choice by building up a better public service network for parents who do not have cars to send their children to the school that they choose?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. At the moment, far too many parents do not have a realistic choice as to whether to transport their child to school by public transport, by car or whatever. We want to encourage, through our work with local government, projects and approaches that will achieve precisely what he suggests, so that people can have a real choice between travelling by public transport or walking or cycling to school rather than going by car in the numbers that they do now. I am amazed that this approach is not being supported by the Opposition parties; it should be supported right across the House.

The Secretary of State will be aware how vital and valued school transport is in rural areas. Will he take on board the concerns of the parents and teachers at Brereton school in my constituency about the category of vehicles being used at present? The hon. Member for Colne Valley (Kali Mountford) is quite right to say that safety is vital when transporting young children, and proper seat belts, not just lap belts, are essential. Will the right hon. Gentleman take on board those views when he considers these matters?

I certainly will. Perhaps the hon. Lady could let me have details of the particular points raised by the school that she mentioned, with which I am not familiar. I would be happy to take them on board. She began by saying, quite rightly, that people value the chance to have a bus to take their child to school. The truth is, however, that only some parents have that chance at the moment. I should have thought that we should extend that choice more widely.

When my right hon. Friend makes any announcements next week, will he take into account how important it is to enable children to go to a local school of high quality, so that they can walk there?

I completely agree with that, without any qualification. That is what I did throughout my life, and it is the right way to proceed. As my hon. Friend knows, the way to achieve that is to raise the standards of schools so that people can have confidence in the quality of their local school. That is precisely what our policies are about, and that is what we have been achieving.

What research the Department has conducted into the effect of Sure Start on children's development. [181593]

What assessment he has made of the impact of Sure Start in assisting children with their education. [181603]

We are undertaking a national evaluation of Sure Start. Early findings already show that children attending pre-school education do better than those staying at home full-time, and that disadvantaged children benefit most. Local evaluations of Sure Start local programmes show that they are also making an impact for parents and children in a variety of ways, including cutting the number of children entering school with a special educational needs statement, cutting emergency referrals to social services, improving breast-feeding rates, cutting smoking in pregnancy, reducing postnatal depression, improving speech and language development, and helping parents to find work.

That research was fully reflected at the meeting that I had last Friday at Hyde Sure Start, when was told by Stacey Isles that Sure Start had completely changed her life. All the parents there asked me to come back to the House and ask the Government to guarantee that the money for sure Start would continue after the text general election Can my right hon. Friend give my Hyde Sure Start parents that guarantee?

We are currently considering the implications of the very generous settlement for early years education that the Chancellor gave us in the Budget, which involves a 17 per cent. real-terms increase n spending every year over the coming spending review Period. We shall give priority to ensuring the continuation of programmes that are now proven to be affective.

Jonathan Shaw.

Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker— [Interruption.] I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. This Shaw did lot get off to a very good start, did he? Will my right hon. Friend tell the House what consideration she has given to the new developments in the proposals for children's centres, and how they are to link in with the development of schools services and the child-centred approach outlined n the Green Paper "Every Child Matters"? It is vital that all those different components join up and that Sure Start forms an integral part of that programme. What is more, it needs to be an integral part of many more communities. We have 500, but we need 500 more.

We are ensuring that the Sure Start principles are embedded in the development of the children's centre programmes. That means bringing together all the services that impact on a child and their family's life in their early years, around the needs of that child. We are ensuring, that throughout our radical transformation of children's services, with the introduction of both children's trusts and extended schools. My hon. Friend is right to point out that using schools as a non-stigmatised safe environment in which to build many of those services is the appropriate way to go. I look not just for 500 more Sure Start programmes but for a Sure Start children's centre in every community in this country.

Liberal Democrats welcome the Sure Start programme and we want to add our congratulations on the 524 centres that celebrated that programme last month. For many of our poorest families Sure Start is an irrelevance, because it simply does not exist. The Daycare Trust has done some research, which shows that 600,000 children aged under three, from some of our poorest families, have no access—only one child in 14 has access—to a free or subsidised place. When will the Minister guarantee that the poorest children in this land will get access t o quality child care before the age of three? Does she agree that the irrelevance of the money being given to son e of the wealthiest parents in this country through the child trust fund—£1 billion in the next Parliament—could be better spent on dealing with and providing education in early years settings for some of our poorest children from our poorest families?

Before this Government came into office, there was no Sure Start programme, no free part-time nursery education for every three and four-year-old, and no national child care strategy. Since we have been in government, we have created more than 500 Sure Start programmes, we have free part-time nursery education for the first time ever, with a new frontier for the welfare state for every three am four-year-old, and we have created more than 1 million new child care places for nearly 2 million children. We will carry on developing our existing programmes, which will spread to more children living in poverty. It is not a question of doing one thing rather than another—building an asset base for children, particularly the poorest, so that when they come of age at 18 they have some of their own money to invest in their future, s as important as ensuring that through education care and health provision they get the very best start.

Order. Sally Keeble.

Contrary to what the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) said, the two Sure Starts in my constituency are incredibly focused on the disadvantaged, and have transformed the lives of those children. However, can my right hon. Friend say how the benefits will spread? As she knows, in constituencies such as Northampton, North, where many women work shifts and have flexible working arrangements, there is a huge need for much wider provision, which must work flexibly so that parents can mix and match child care for their working day, and get the same quality of services as is available in Sure Start.

I completely agree with my hon. Friend that Sure Start transforms the lives of many individual children and their families. I spend much of my time visiting Sure Start programmes. Whenever I talk to a Sure Start mum, the main thing that they say is that the isolation of coming home in the first few days when they have a new baby is completely mitigated by being able to access the services from Sure Start. We need more, and we need to ensure that what we offer is flexible to fit in with the different working patterns that many parents have today. I take those points, and I am considering them as we take forward our programme with the generous financial settlement that the Chancellor gave us.

When my right hon. Friend looks at various forms of Sure Start provision, will she look at some in my constituency? There is a children's centre at Highfield on the edge of a very Asian area, and another at Guardhouse, on the edge of a white area. Will my right hon. Friend consider the impact on those two communities of getting children together at an early age? In my constituency it is unusual to see white and Asian kids together This provision gives Asian kids the advantage of speaking English before going to school, and I hope that eventually it will have an effect on white children and parents, moving them away from the terrible impact of the British National party.

I spent yesterday looking at Sure Start programmes in Blackburn, which face issues similar to those in my hon. Friend's constituency. Steps are being taken to ensure that children from different communities and backgrounds come together, build respect for each other's communities and are properly integrated without assimilating their varying cultures. We need to use these excellent early years facilities to break down some of the intolerance and suspicion that all too often exist in communities throughout Britain.

If he will take steps to reduce variations in pupil funding per head between counties. [181594]

The current system, which was the subject of widespread consultation, reflects the relative need of counties and metropolitan areas alike. Our priority is to restore stability and predictability to the school funding system, and we will not be changing it during 2004–05 or 2005–06.

We in Worcestershire are always immensely grateful to the Minister for the courteous way in which he listens to our arguments, and for the commitment he has made to go on listening to them. Admittedly we are always disappointed by the outcome, but at least he listens.

The temptations of constructive engagement with the hon. Gentleman and his friends are so great that I certainly would not want to turn away from the dialogue that has been initiated.

As my hon. Friend knows, there has been a new formula since April 2003. It is, without doubt, simpler and clearer than its predecessor. Does my hon. Friend accept, however, that a league table of per pupil funding across the country shows that the gap between the best and the worst funding has widened under the new system? Does that not mean that it is deficient in justice and equity?

Having acknowledged the existence of constructive engagement with the hon. Member for Mid-Worcestershire (Mr. Luff), I feel that I should pay tribute to my hon. Friend for his assiduous campaigning in the interests of Staffordshire. He will, I think, be as pleased as I am that Staffordshire's per pupil increase in the school formula funding share this year is 6.3 per cent. above the national average, thus narrowing the gap between it and other authorities. I am sure he will also agree that it is important for all school funding to be based on fair and transparent criteria, rather than arbitrary targets. It is on that basis that we will continue to make progress.

What progress he has made in meeting his target to reduce truancy. [181595]

This is the first Government to put attendance at the heart of their policies for improving standards and pupil achievement. Our measures provide both support for pupils and their parents and sanctions to reinforce parental responsibility. The year 2002–03 saw school attendance at a record high, and 1,300 truants back at school each day.

Despite £600 million of taxpayers' money having been spent on reducing truancy since 1997, secondary school truancy has shot up from 450,000 pupils in 1997 to 630,000 in 2003. Is that not another fine example of a Government who know how to spend very well, but how to manage very poorly?

The hon. Gentleman has read out very effectively the briefing from central office. I should have thought that he would welcome the fact that attendance in our schools is at a record high and that those who are truanting do so less frequently. There are other realities, however, including the fact that when we give more priority to the issue of attendance, heads are far less likely to authorise a level of attendance that they previously authorised. In this country, 50 per cent. of truancy takes place with the knowledge and collusion of parents. This Government are tackling that problem in a serious, fundamental and long-term way by reforming the curriculum so that it is more relevant to the needs of individual young people and by offering individual support to pupils and families who have genuine challenges and problems, but also by ensuring that there is enforcement where parents are not fulfilling their responsibilities. That is a long-term sustained strategy to tackle truancy in a serious way.

In addition to those very important truancy-specific measures to which my hon. Friend has just alluded, which are certainly having their impact in my constituency, is it not the case that children stay in school if they are interested in what is going on there? They need to value that experience, and our focus on and success in improving teaching, learning and skill leadership is also having a significant impact.

I agree entirely with my hon. and learned Friend. That is central to raising school standards, to improving the leadership of schools and to having a positive ethos in e very school in every part of the country. We must hive a far more flexible curriculum to turn young people on to learning. The 14 to 16 flexibility programme has been a major success, and we are reducing the statutory core curriculum for 14 to 16-year-olds from next September and introducing a new young apprenticeship. Central to the Tomlinson review on the future of 14 to 19 education is the need to ensure that we have pathways through the system for young people that motivate and inspire them, and do not differentiate between vocational and academic education. It is extremely important that we tackle not just the symptoms of truancy but their causes, by reforming the curriculum, tailoring education to suit the needs of every individual young person and ensuring that behaviour and discipline are central to our agenda of raising school standards.

Will the Minister accept that the majority of the 1 million pupils who played truant last year were teenagers who voted with their feet because they were dissatisfied with the relevance to them of the education that they were receiving? Will he therefore take it from the Conservatives that we are genuinely willing, despite our differences on other educational matters, to work with him and Mike Tomlinson on providing a 14 to 19 curriculum that cat survive a change of Government and provide stability to teachers and others? Will he and his ministerial colleagues undertake to work with all parties in the House to ensure that we can do that constructively?

I strongly welcome the hon. Gentleman's commitment to trying to achieve consensus on a new 14 to 19 phase of education that will stand the test of time and represent the test interests of every single young person who accesses the education system in this country. Yes, of course we will work with members of other political parties and with people with expertise in this field. It was brave of the Government to set up the Tomlinson group, external from and independent of Government, to make credible, acceptable proposals so that we have, for the first time in this country, a 14 to 19 phase of education that inspires young people and also gets rid of this country's historic divide between academic and vocational education. That is central to ensuring that we do something about the fact that far too many young people in this country drop out at 17. That is the great challenge facing the English education system, and I would welcome a political consensus to address that.

What plans he has to improve skills in the construction sector. [181597]

We have set up a network of employer-led sector skills councils to work with the Government to meet the skill needs of their sectors, and Construction Skills—the sector skills council for construction—was licensed in September 2003. Construction has been designated as one of four priority sectors, and a new sector skills agreement will set out how the sector skills council and other partners will maintain and improve the sector's skills base.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply, but will he pay tribute to the excellent work being done in my constituency by West Anglia college, which, under the first-class leadership of its principal, Peter Stewart, is providing a very large number of construction skill places in East Anglia? Given the recent Learning and Skills Council survey, which revealed that skills shortages in construction could be running as high as 38 per cent., does the Minister agree that it is vital that trained and motivated plumbers and electricians be attracted into the further education sector as instructors and lecturers? To do so is obviously very difficult, given that they can earn so much in the private sector. What is the Minister going to do to address this situation, and how will he ensure that FE colleges can pay competitive salaries?

I am happy to pay tribute to the work of the college in the hon. Gentleman's constituency. I am also proud to say that we have a record 255,000 young people participating in apprenticeships this year, which is a source of celebration but not complacency. Rebuilding vocational education is not just about aspiring to offer that route to young people; it is also about investing in the capital infrastructure, which is why the centres of vocational excellence are so important, and why specialist status is vital. It is also important that we recruit into our education system people with vocational skills—the trainers—who are able to transfer their expertise and knowledge to young people.

I commend the Government on making construction a priority in the sector skills council. Perhaps the Minister will commend my local authority on its housing stock transfer initiative, which will ensure that the young people who are taken on are trained specifically in construction trades and skills to maintain that housing stock. Does he agree that there is no more important time to encourage the development of such skills, given that we are witnessing the biggest ever investment in new building, such as housing, schools and hospitals?

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. This Government's investment in capital infrastructure is absolutely central to the social and economic regeneration of the nation, but we also need to ensure that we have the necessary skills to meet the demand. One key issue is to ensure that the Government and the public sector meet their responsibilities in terms of the people whom they employ and the use of their procurement power. That is why, when the Government announce next week the progress that has been made one year on from the skills strategy, we will focus on the progress that we have made in meeting our responsibilities as a procurer of goods and services, and as an employer.

The construction industry, as has already been made clear, faces a severe skills shortage, which has led to recruitment problems, higher operating costs, lost orders and delayed product development. While the construction industry is a core economic component, it is evident that across the economy, business is facing chronic skills shortages. To date, the Government have had little impact in this regard, and employers and colleges remain dislocated. The Learning and Skills Council is currently submerged in bureaucracy, and it provides inadequate, poorly structured and over-complex funding. When will the Government listen to real business and respond to its demand for greater focus on basic skills, more work-based training, and funding for learning, not just qualification—

Order. One supplementary is fine.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I suspect that the consensus has just come to a grinding halt. I am delighted, actually, because I am not too comfortable when there is consensus between the Government and the Opposition. The hon. Gentleman should recognise that the fact that a record number of young people are undertaking apprenticeships is a source of celebration. He should also recognise that this Government—through our key stage 3 strategy, our reform of 14 to 19 education and the new GCSEs in vocational subjects—are finally addressing the problem of young people being disengaged from education far too early.

What steps he is taking to secure the financial viability of further education colleges. [181598]

Funding allocated to the Learning and Skills Council for further education is set to increase by more than £1 billion over the three years to 2005–06. In 2003–04, the LSC increased colleges' unit of funding by 2 per cent. in real terms. Colleges that meet their targets will receive a further real-terms increase of 2.5 per cent. in 2004–05. The sector's success has created pressures on funding for this year and in recognition of that we have added £130 million extra to the LSC's budget.

I listened carefully to what my right hon. Friend said, but there seems to be a huge mismatch between what the Government are saying and the reality on the ground. I recently met the new principal of Nelson and Colne college of further education in Pendle and she gave me a briefing note listing 17 areas of concern where the financial viability of the college was being put in jeopardy by factors outside the college's control. I ask my right hon. Friend to look again not just at the Nelson and Colne college but at a raft of colleges across the north-west that are making it very clear that they cannot deliver the Government's agenda—they want to be able to—because the resources simply are not there.

Let me say to my hon. Friend that I am perfectly willing to look into those 17 points. I would be very interested in seeing what I could do to help with those problems. We know that Nelson and Colne had a particular problem in failing to recruit the number of students that it expected. The whole sector—and everyone in the House—must accept that the Learning and Skills Council cannot provide funding for students who are not there. As I understand the position, this year—let alone last year, when there was a 2 per cent. real-terms increase&Nelson and Colne will receive a further 2.5 per cent. real-terms increase in funding. I accept that there are real issues which my hon. Friend is raising on behalf of his college and I am perfectly willing to look into them, but it should not detract from the overall record levels of funding that we are currently putting into further education.

Of course the worry for the college is that, with the Government having provided an extra £130 million, it will find in due course that it is clawed back through lower grants. The Government have a track record of clawing money back when no one is looking. Can the Minister confirm that the extra £130 million is a new baseline figure for FE budgets for the spending review period, and can he guarantee that it will not be paid for in future by reducing the annual grants increases that colleges would otherwise have received?

I would love to be in a position where we could do things when no one is looking, but that is what parliamentary scrutiny is meant to avoid. I can give the guarantee that the £130 million is not coming from the unit of funding. It is a very genuine attempt to resolve a very real problem raised with us by the Learning and Skills Council. I should like to put another point to the hon. Gentleman. I, too, welcome the consensus built up by the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Collins) in respect of 14-to-19 education, but education is so crucial that I am amazed that his party has given a guarantee to preserve funding for schools, while planning £18 billion worth of funding cuts, which is bound to hit further education. We will have a completely different dialogue, I think, if we ever get to the fairy tale of a future Conservative Government.

Is the Minister aware that one of the most important colleges in north Derbyshire was a mining college, but the Tories clawed back all the jobs? The net result was that the college had to change its nature. What is happening now is a 5,000-job development at Markham and Bolsover, about two miles away from the old mining college. Will the Minister meet Derbyshire county council—part of the stakeholders in the new project, just off the Ml, junction 29A—to ensure that we get those jobs and all the facilities for training that will be needed? As we all know, some jobs are for life, but a lot of new jobs need constant re-training; and re-skilling.

I can promise my hon. Friend that I will turn off the M1 at junction 29B, or wherever it is, on the way to Hull—

29A.

The famous junction 29A—it's just as well I checked. I shall indeed have the meeting that my hon. Friend has asked for, as it is crucial that we have the skills and training ready to deal with the increase in employment numbers to which he referred.

What his policy is on teaching food hygiene in schools. [181599]

All primary pupils are taught food technology as part of the national curriculum. At key stage 3, the Government strongly encourage secondary schools to offer pupils the opportunity to study food technology, and 90 per cent. do so. Pupils team procedures for food safety and hygiene, which it includes safe food handling in the preparation, cooking and storage of food.

I hear what my hon. Friend says, but food is one of the main ways by which infections and diseases are acquired and transmitted. Is it not vital that more is done, beyond the primary level, to ensure that all our children understand basic food hygiene, which there is not really much about in the national curriculum? I used to be a teacher, and I did not find that children at secondary level were given much instruction in food hygiene. Will my hon. Friend have another look at this matter? I am worried that we are creating a time bomb, as fewer and fewer of today's children understand basic food hygiene.

I shall be happy to look at the matter again. As my hon. Friend suggests, there is a strong focus on personal hygiene in the primary school curriculum, but the focus in secondary schools is more on science teaching. As he is probably aware, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is leading on a cross-government project to publish a healthy living blueprint later this year. I undertake to ensure that concerns about food hygiene are central to that document.

It has been my pleasure over the past few years to present food hygiene certificates to pupils at the Priory secondary school in my constituency. They are taught by one of the teachers, Christine Osbourne, in her spare time. Will my hon. Friend join me in paying tribute to Christine Osbourne for giving up her time in that way? Will he encourage other schools and teachers to follow that example?

I am very happy to pay tribute to Christine Osbourne and the pupils at the Priory school, and to join my hon. Friend in congratulating them on their achievements. There are many other fine examples of teachers who go beyond the call of duty to offer similar instruction. I am sure that all hon. Members would want to congratulate them.

What recent meetings he has had with employers to discuss vocational education. [181600]

I regularly meet the CBI, the TUC and educationists to discuss skills and vocational education. Jointly with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, I chair the Skills Alliance, which brings those organisations together with the Small Business Service and the relevant Departments.

That might be all well and good but, after more than seven long years of this wretched Government, surely the Secretary of State understands that we lag way behind other European countries, especially France and Germany, in the numbers of youngsters with apprenticeship; and vocational qualifications. The Government love setting targets: when will the Secretary of State set a target on this matter, and when would he expect to reach it?

I am delighted that consensus across the House is breaking out on this key question, as manifested by that contribution. The number of modern apprenticeships has tripled since this Government came to office and the Government the hon. Gentleman supported left office. We are widening apprenticeships across a variety of sectors of industry. The traditional areas are construction and engineering, but we are making modern apprenticeships much more widely available. We are integrating them into the 14 to 16 age range, so that students can begin the work earlier, and we are also linking them into our foundation degrees as part of a coherent, positive and strong programme.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Reading borough council has applied for academy status for Thamesbridge college, in partnership with the local business community? The aim is to give the college, and its staff and students, a positive future, and to provide enhanced opportunities for vocational training to meet the needs of employers and the very successful local economy of Reading and the Thames valley.

I am aware of that, and I am glad that my hon. Friend raised the subject and is supporting that initiative. It allows me to make the point that our exciting new schools programmes, whether for specialist schools or city academies, are path-breaking on the academic-vocational question, and recognise the need to invest and give students real choice about what they will focus on in their future lives.

If he will make a statement on plans to improve special needs education in England. [181601]

We published "Removing Barriers to Achievement", our strategy for special educational needs in England, on 11 February 2004. The strategy contains a programme of practical measures to promote early identification of children's special educational needs, boost early intervention to support those needs, improve coordination of services to children and their families, improve staff training and build strong collaboration between mainstream and special schools to share knowledge and expertise. Those measures will help to provide the opportunities and support for children with SEN to realise their potential.

As there is a shortage of trained SEN professionals, does the Minister agree that what parents require for their children is more choice, whether they want to go for a special educational needs school or the mainstream?

I completely agree that parents should have choice, and that the facilities for children should meet the individual needs of each child—but if the Conservative party were to introduce a voucher worth £5,600, how would that help to pay for a child in a non-maintained special educational needs school, where the average cost is more than £41,000?

Is the Minister aware that since I held my debate with the Minister for School Standards about the Government policy of inclusion, I have had letters from all over the country saying the same thing—that Government policy is being prayed in aid by educationists and accountants who are closing special schools in the name of inclusion? Will the Minister get her Department to investigate what is actually happening? Does she not agree that those of us who have very disabled children should not have to spend our time fighting to keep open the wonderful schools that do such a good job?

We are attempting to maintain choice for individual children and their families. Closure of special schools has not moved apace under this Government. There has been a small closure of special maintained schools, but it has taken place at about the same rate as under the Conservative Government, and there has been growth in the non-maintained special school sector. An increasing number of parents wish their children with disabilities or special educational needs to be educated in the mainstream sector. Where that is the choice of the parent and the child, we attempt to facilitate it. That provides both good special schools and good choice for people to have their children educated in the maintained mainstream sector, which is the underpinning drive of our policy for children with special educational needs and disabilities.

What measures does the Minister have in place to address the chronic under-provision of speech and language therapy for special needs pupils? The national professional body says that 780 speech and language therapy students graduate every year and enter the job market. What will she do to ensure that more of those graduates are attracted into special education, to ensure that the pupils there attain the communication skills that they need?

I agree that there is a shortage of speech and language therapists. Interestingly enough, because of our Sure Start programmes we are identifying the speech and language needs of children at a much earlier age. The answer is to train more people, and we are doing that. We will provide 6,500 more speech and language therapists and other health professionals in the schools sector by 2004, and we are training nearly 4,500 more therapists and key professional staff each year. I have also seen schools and Sure Start programmes which, through cascading some limited training to support staff in the schools or in the programmes, have built skills among other people in the staff cohort so that they too can help with the speech and language needs of young children.

What plans he has to increase the number of qualified teachers teaching mathematics in secondary schools.

This Government have delivered an increase of about three quarters to the number of new entrants to maths teacher training in the past four years, and there are now one third fewer maths teacher vacancies than in 2001. The new measures announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 28 June will help schools to recruit and retain maths teachers, including through higher training bursaries, golden hellos for mathematicians, more maths places on the graduate teacher programme, and higher pay for advanced skills teachers.

How will the Minister finance his proposals for higher salaries? I have specific concerns about the pressures on teachers in low-funded authorities such as Poole and Bournemouth in which schools are struggling to identify funds to implement the work load reduction scheme. Surely it is important to ensure that we haw good conditions for all teachers.

Obviously I agree that it is important that we have the right training, support and conditions for all teachers. I hope that the hon. Lady agrees that the Government's determination through the advanced skills teacher scheme, for example, to pay the extra salary from the centre gets over the sort of troubles to which she refers. As we have 4,000 advanced skills teachers, the measure represents major support for the quality of teaching throughout the country.

If she will make a statement on prosecution rates for violent crimes in North Yorkshire in (a) January 1997, (b) January 2000 and (c) January 2003. [181614]

In January 1997, 59 defendants were prosecuted for violent crime in North Yorkshire magistrates court. In January 2000, the number was 77.

I understand that we do not have the figures for January 2003 in that case, but I thank the Solicitor-General for her answer. At Question Time last month, she hinted hat there was scope for greater cooperation between the Crown Prosecution Service and the police in North Yorkshire to prosecute people for violent crimes, burglaries and other crimes after they had been detected. Will she elaborate on how she would like such further co-operation to develop?

That co-operation happens through the North Yorkshire criminal justice board, which is chaired by the chief Crown prosecutor for North Yorkshire, Rob Turnbull. There is a constant process in which the police, the courts, the Crown Prosecution Service, prison and probation services and other agencies work together to ensure that the issues that the hon. Lady raises, which are of concern to her constituents and people more widely in North Yorkshire, are dealt with. I was interested to note the figures on the hon. Lady's area. I welcome the fact that the percentage of ineffective trials in the Crown and magistrates courts in her area is low. That shows that there are fewer adjournments than before, which means that offenders are brought to justice more swiftly.

What plans she has to include the Crown Prosecution Service in multi-agency working. [181615]

The Crown Prosecution Service works with many different agencies including local police, local government, Victim Support and community groups.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that reply. Is she aware of the key role played by the Crown Prosecution Service in south Wales in the multidisciplinary Cardiff domestic violence forum and when working with the Cardiff won pen's safety unit, and that south Wales CPS was praised for its work on domestic violence in the recent inspectorate report? How does she think the CPS can become even more involved in inter-agency work?

I am glad to welcome my hon. Friend's comments about the role played by the Crown Prosecution Service, together with statutory and voluntary agencies in Cardiff, on tackling domestic violence. Of course, 25 per cent. of all reported violent crime represents domestic violence so the issue is by no means marginal. I am aware that there is scope for further work.

May I urge my right hon. and learned Friend to consider the involvement of outside agencies in training Crown Prosecution Service staff? Having witnessed difficulties when lawyers did not appear to understand the complex issues involved, the participation of those agencies in cases involving sexual offences, child abuse and—as we have heard, domestic violence—would surely help us to make progress.

My hon. Friend makes an important point, but we need a two-stage process. CPS lawyers are increasingly expert in difficult and challenging cases such as rape and the prosecution of cases of sexual offences against children, but they must be aware of the wider context in which those offences take place, and must work closely with local agencies. It is also important, however, that they take part in training staff from those agencies so that they, in turn, are aware of the way in which the criminal justice system works and can reassure victims that a prosecution team will work together to ensure that they get justice.

What recent discussions she has had with her counterparts in the United States concerning the fate of UK citizens held in Guantanamo bay. [81617]

The Attorney-General last had discussions with his counterparts in the US about Guantanomo bay in February 2004. Following discussions with the US led by the Attorney-General, the UK Government concluded on the basis of his views that the US military commission process would not provide sufficient guarantees of a fair trial in accordance with international standards. The UK Government's position remains that the British detainees should either be tried fairly in accordance with international standards or be returned to the United Kingdom.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for her reply. In a landmark decision, the American Supreme Court said that the detainees can challenge their detention without trial in Guantanamo bay in the United States courts. Will the British Government act on behalf of the four UK citizens and take their case to the American courts?

We are not yet aware whether or not any applications have been made on behalf of the British detainees. As for the US Supreme Court judgment, it was very recent and we are considering its implications.

May I reinforce the point made by the hon. Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice)? He is entirely right—unless the British Government rally round and give the detainees assistance in Supreme Court proceedings or elsewhere the relief will be fairly lame, so I hope that the Solicitor-General listens sympathetically to the hon. Gentleman.

The House has heard the points made by the right hon. and learned Gentleman and my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice), and those matters are all under active consideration. If there is something to be announced, it will be announced, but I cannot say anything other than that the matter is under consideration.

But that is simply not good enough. So much time has elapsed, and those people have been unlawfully detained for an extremely long time. We want to know what action the Attorney-General will take. He made his views known last week in a speech at the Cour de Cassation, and was right to say:

"Any restriction on fundamental rights must be imposed in accordance with the rule of law."

Perhaps I can just step back, as I know the whole House appreciates the Attorney-General satisfying himself as to whether or not the way in which the US authorities plan to deal with the British citizens detained in Guantanamo bay accords with international law. It wanted him to make that decision impartially on the evidence in the case and give his advice clearly and straightforwardly. I am sure that it appreciates the fact that, as he formed the view that the proposals for dealing with the detainees did not comply with international law, attempts have been made to negotiate with the US authorities to persuade them to change the way in which they intend to deal with the detainees so that they are treated in accordance with international law. Progress was made and at least five detainees were released. I know that the whole House welcomes that.

Does the Solicitor-General agree that in the context of a trial by a military tribunal, it ought to be possible for such a trial to take place in compliance with international standards, including independent representation, an independent element on the tribunal, proper procedure and a proper ability to assess evidence? Those standards are common to our common law jurisdiction and that of the United States. Have the US Government advanced any argument to explain why they cannot meet those minimum standards in the type of tribunal that they want to set up?

All I can say to the hon. Gentleman is that we have made it clear to the US authorities what we consider the international standards to be. They have net been prepared to accede to that. They have, however been prepared to suspend bringing the UK detainees before the military commission because of our strong representations to the effect that we did not consider them to be guaranteeing a fair trial in accordance with international law. There is no difference on that between any of us in the House. The Government and the Attorney-General have made their position clear, but at the end of the day we have to persuade the US authorities to return the detainees if they are unprepared as at present they appear to be, to afford them a fair trial according to international standards.