What progress has been made in raising educational standards at each key stage; and if he will make a statement. [194091]

Since 1997, we have seen significant improvements at each key stage. Over this period, the percentage of pupils reaching the expected level for their age in mathematics, for example, has increased by 6 percentage points at key stage 1, 12 percentage points at key stage 2 and 13 percentage points at key stage 3. The percentage of 15-year-olds getting five or more GCSEs or equivalent at grades A* to C has increased by 8.3 percentage points, with some of the biggest improvements in the most deprived areas.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his answer. In anticipation of that answer, I did a little homework on cause and effect. I discovered that, in the Leeds education authority area, funding per pupil has increased by 37 per cent. since 1997 and that there are 913 more teaching assistants and 1,356 more support staff than there were seven years ago. It does not take a great—

Order. Will the hon. Gentleman send these discoveries in writing to the Minister?

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the outstandingly high quality of his homework, which sums up why there has been such great improvement and investment, and such substantial reform, which mean better education for the people of this country.

A vital stage in raising standards at key stage 4 will be the recommendations of the Tomlinson report. In a letter to the 20 October, the Secretary of State said:Financial Times on

"The status quo is not an option . . . we should have a constructive debate about the way forward, not dismiss a substantive set of reforms out of hand."

Yet on 19 October, the Prime Minister seems to have done just that in a speech to the CBI, when he insisted that

"GCSEs and A-levels will stay".

Which position are the Government now taking on the Tomlinson report—that of the Secretary of State or that of the Prime Minister?

With respect, the hon. Gentleman simply has not been up with the debate. My remarks about the status quo not being an option were made in this House in a statement, to which his hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) responded. Both what we say—that Tomlinson is the right way forward—and the fact that any diploma structure would include proper recognition for A-levels and GCSEs are right. That is the core issue that we debated at length when I made the statement. Where the hon. Gentleman is right is that Tomlinson will enable standards to be driven up and take the situation forward in a very positive way. I am delighted that we will publish a White Paper early in the new year to set out exactly how we intend to implement it.

Does the Secretary of State agree with Professor Adrian Smith that multiplication tables should be taught in our primary schools? If he does, what is his estimate of the proportion of primary schools that teach multiplication tables in a way that ensures that our children learn them by heart?

First, as the hon. Gentleman knows, I have accepted the reports and proposals of Professor Adrian Smith. Indeed, I appointed him to his role precisely because of the quality of his advice. Secondly, I believe that multiplication tables are very widely taught in primary schools. I do not have a figure to hand, but I can say that in the primary school that I most recently visited, in Yorkshire, multiplication tables for children were on a whiteboard that morning—and that was a random case. I simply do not accept the hypothesis behind the question that there is some lack of attention given to basic arithmetical methods in schools. In fact, I think that the very reverse is the case.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is most important to reassure parents, teachers and students that standards are rising? Will he flag up the information that the Education and Skills Committee received from the permanent secretary of Norway's education department when it visited Norway 10 days ago? The permanent secretary said, "We would like to learn how the UK is succeeding in raising standards so dramatically. We spend much more per head on our children without such good results."

My hon. Friend is correct, and I am glad to say that such examples are not confined to Scandinavia. Last week, a delegation from the Education Minister to the German Lander asked the same question; Germany had a great national debate, almost a crisis, after its relatively poor performance in PISA—the programme for international student assessment—a couple of years ago. Yesterday, I received an invitation from the new Spanish Education Minister for my Department and me to attend a seminar in Madrid to discuss raising education standards in Spain. We are doing well by any international comparison.

If he will visit Colchester to meet the heads of schools with a high proportion of children from military families. [194093]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State listened carefully to the views expressed by schools when he visited Colchester last year. The Department will work closely with the National Association of State Schools for Service Children, and we are currently looking at ways in which we can help to encourage the sharing of experience and good practice to support schools with service children.

That answer will not do, because 16 months ago the Secretary of State, in a high-profile visit to Colchester, met head teachers and governors of the six schools that attract a large proportion of children from military families and led them to believe, in the words of the headline in the Colchester Evening Gazette, "You will get more money". The Secretary of State should make a return visit to explain what has happened over the past 16 months and why the promises that he gave on what was a Labour party stump visit have not been delivered.

May I first say to the hon. Gentleman that every visit that my right hon. Friend makes is high profile? The issue is important and it should not be used for petty political point scoring. We should be concerned about three elements: first, that children of service families have access to high-quality education; secondly, that their parents can be guaranteed that that will be the case; and thirdly, that schools that deal with a disproportionately high number of children from service families should receive the support that they need to cope with the inevitable turbulence. Consequently, we will work with the newly reformed National Association of State Schools for Service Children and examine tangible and practical measures to support schools and families in those circumstances. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will make a constructive contribution to that process.

What plans his Department has to promote healthy eating in schools; and if he will make a statement. [194095]

What progress has been made on improving healthy eating in schools. [194096]

In September this year, we published the "Healthy Living Blueprint", which includes important measures to promote healthy eating in schools.

Although I am delighted that the Health Committee report on obesity has triggered a national and international debate on the subject, action is now needed. Does the Minister agree that the amount of fat and sugar in what we eat and drink is a critical factor in obesity? If so, will he take action on the important issue of vending machines in our schools and address what is sold from those machines and when such snacks are available to our children?

I agree that we must reduce fat, sugar and salt consumption. We are re-examining the standards for secondary schools and primary schools with respect to both vending machines, which is the point that he has raised, and school meals served at lunchtime.

On vending machines, the Minister will be aware that Mars and Coca-Cola cannot be advertised in vending machines in Scotland. Does the Minister plan to introduce a similar ban here?

I understand that those companies volunteered to make that arrangement, and that they will do the same here. We want to ensure that healthy options are available through vending machines. Excellent examples exist of schools providing fruit juices, cereal bars and other such options in their vending machines, and some evidence suggests that children prefer to take those options, where they are affordable.

I know that my hon. Friend is aware of the campaign by Ilford Jewish primary school to extend the free fruit initiative to key stage 2—a petition has been sent to Downing street and the school has started its own orchard. Is he considering extending the scheme to key stage 2, which is the object of the campaign run by children and staff?

I am aware of that campaign by Ilford Jewish primary school and of my hon. Friend's strong and consistent support for it. The Department of Health has been promoting the fresh fruit scheme, which has made a real difference at key stage 1. We would encourage schools to consider using their resources further to extend the fresh fruit scheme as part of their own healthy eating schemes. We do not have any national plans to fund the fresh fruit scheme beyond key stage 1.

I invite my hon. Friend to visit Four Dwellings school to watch primary school children eating carrots and tomatoes at break and thus see genuine progress. As he makes further progress, will he please not ignore the relationship between healthy eating and physical exercise? Not only calorific intake but how children use up the calories is important. We therefore need a combination of healthy eating and exercise.

Nothing would give me more pleasure than joining my hon. Friend in her constituency to watch children eating their carrots. Indeed, we have redefined carrot as a fruit under the fresh fruit scheme. She is right that healthy eating is only one component of healthy schools. Clearly, the massive investment in improvements to physical education and sport is vital, too.

Government procurement rules mean that schools often have to award food contracts that are based on price. What steps could be introduced to make it easier for schools and local authorities to source more food from local and organic producers? [Interruption.]

My hon. Friends are making puns on the hon. Gentleman's surname. I do not take part in that. We are considering procurement through the healthy living blueprint. It is striking that some schools are managing even with limited budgets to source organic produce locally. We want to ensure that that best practice is shared as widely as possible.

Will my hon. Friend explain why the Government are not considering extending the successful free fruit scheme? Will he also consider the possibility of free milk in schools for younger children?

I agree that the scheme is successful. Of course, it has only just gone nationwide and we want to monitor its impact. To be frank, the scheme carries a cost. The Department of Health has come up with the money and we are grateful for that, but we must consider our spending priorities for schools. The focus is on ensuring that as much money as possible goes into school budgets so that it can be spent effectively. The same thinking applies to school milk. Many schools provide it, and although we welcome that we do not want to impose it as a requirement on every school when there are other pressures on school budgets.

Has the Minister read the evidence that when healthy, good-quality food is provided in school, more students opt for school meals? Has he seen the evidence of the link between good healthy food and good behaviour? Does he understand why secondary school students feel that they are being treated as second-class citizens when twice as much money is spent on food for prisoners as on food for students? Does he understand the Soil Association's criticism of the Department yesterday that rightly highlighted the shocking loss of mineral content in school meals? Students get only 80 per cent. of their iron intake and 68 per cent. of their zinc intake from them. That could lead to long-term problems. The Department talks of an evaluation exercise, setting up an expert steering group and more monitoring. Does the Minister understand that less talk and more action is needed?

Action is precisely what we are taking. We introduced basic nutritional standards, which did not exist before 1997. Some of the examples that the Soil Association gave yesterday do not fulfil our current standards, which we are now revising. We have got the experts in to examine the matter and we shall have new standards for secondary schools from next year. We accept that standards are not as high as they should be in many secondary schools. We will work with the Soil Association and others to ensure that we have the best standards in every school.

Although there are many excellent school catering staff, does my hon. Friend agree that many staff were deskilled when nutritional standards for school meals were abolished? What are his plans for improving the training of school meals staff? Evidence in my constituency shows that having good, well-trained cooks who are prepared to cook from scratch radically improves the quality of school meals.

My hon. Friend is right. I pay tribute to her for her excellent work in raising the matter in the House and beyond. One of our commitments in the blueprint is to improve the training for catering staff in schools so that we can attain the enhanced quality for which she rightly asks.

How many pupils were being educated in grammar schools in England (a) on the latest date for which figures are available and (b) five years ago. [194097]

In January 2004, there were 152,610 pupils in grammar schools in England—4.6 per cent. of all secondary pupils. In 1999, the figure was 140,880—4.5 per cent. of secondary pupils then.

Is the Secretary of State aware that one of the few pleasant surprises provided by the Government is the positive attitude that they have taken to the survival and development of grammar schools? Can he give us an assurance that that policy will continue?

The hon. Gentleman's surprise is inaccurate, in that that is not exactly the course of action that we have been following; I am sorry to disappoint him. The Select Committee on Education and Skills produced a carefully considered report on this matter, which was published a couple of months ago, and we will provide a detailed response to its proposals in the next week or so. The hon. Gentleman will have to wait until then to see precisely how we deal with those proposals.

Does the Secretary of State agree with the 1997 quote from a Labour colleague of ours? He said that the grammar school system

"was a response to the needs of a vanished society which required a small educated class and a large number of manual workers. It is no longer the appropriate model for a world where most jobs require educated men and women."

Given that the Member in question was my right hon. Friend the Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair), when is the Secretary of State going to do something about this dodo in the educational aviary?

My hon. Friend will be shocked to hear that I agreed then with every word of that speech by my right hon. Friend the Member for Sedgefield and I agree with it now, which is why our recent policy proposals—the five-year plan—focused directly on the needs of every child, using the slogan "every child matters". Society has changed in precisely the way set out by my right hon. Friend, and our education system has to meet the needs of every single person. That is now the test for every school, institution and the Government in this process.

The Secretary of State will doubtless be aware that the grammar schools in my constituency do an excellent job not just for their own pupils and the wider community, but in working very well with all other schools in the area. Will he confirm that the Government have no intention of lowering the percentage needed in a parental ballot to abolish grammar schools, so that I, in turn, can assure all those members of the Labour party in Kent who are trying to destroy Kent's grammar schools that they are wasting their time?

I must refer the hon. Gentleman to the response that we will give to the Select Committee in couple of weeks' time, which will address precisely that point. However, it is worth examining in some detail, and in precisely the way that I have identified, Oftsted's report on education in Kent and the selective system's impact on every child in that county. I know that he will want to be sure that every child in his constituency is getting the support that they need to achieve in every respect, and I commend the Oftsted inspector's report on that matter to him.

If he will make a statement on the provision of children's centres. [194098]

We have already announced 71 children's centres and we will shortly be announcing more. We are committed to providing 2,500 such centres by March 2008, which will include one for each of the 20 per cent. most disadvantaged areas. We are working up plans to provide a children's centre in every community.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is she aware of the great benefit that children's centres have already brought to Blackpool, of the enthusiasm with which parents and professionals have greeted them, and of the welcome for the £1.6 million for the second phase of such centres? However, is she also aware that in order to continue delivering the quality service of the first phase, she might need to consider yet further additional resources?

I am pleased that my hon. Friend is getting such a positive response to children's centres in her community. We are certainly gathering huge amounts of evidence about the impact of Sure Start children's centres on outcomes for children—from the relationship with the mother in the early days, to a child's readiness for school as they move through those early stages. We intend to pursue this programme, and by 2008 we will be spending some £4.4 billion—just from the Department for Education and Skills budget—on early years and Sure Start. I do wonder what would happen to that extremely successful programme, were the Conservative party ever to get back into government.

Children's centres are a good idea; perhaps in her next answer the Minister might refer to fathers, which she did not do a moment ago. She will also want to ensure that state-provided children's centres do not crowd out private and voluntary sector providers. For example, providers currently have to face some 28 separate funding streams and application processes. Is it not time to amalgamate some of these funding streams and tear down the artificial barriers to child care supply?

I am delighted that the hon. Gentleman thinks that children's centres are a good idea, and I look forward to his party committing itself to continuing the expansion of children's centres in the way that we have. I agree that the role of fathers in children's centres is important, and some of our best Sure Start programmes are working hard to engage fathers as well as mothers in their child's early development. I also agree that we have too many funding streams, both for the private and voluntary sector and the statutory sector, to enable local communities to develop children's centres that make sense. That is being examined as we speak, and I hope to have some good news for him on that in the not-too-distant future.

An application for a children's centre is being made from a vibrant, multicultural, multilingual area of my community. Does the Minister have any advice for those making the application in terms of refinement of the criteria?

It sounds as though there may be some problem in relation to the application to which my hon. Friend refers. I am happy to talk to her if she wants to write to me about it. In terms of criteria, we are looking for children's centres to provide services around the needs of the child and their family, bringing together early years education and child care, community health services, from health visitors and midwives through to speech and language therapy, and support for families, whether parenting support for mothers and fathers or support to enable parents to move from education and training into work. We are looking for that coherent set of services, around the needs of the child, in children's centre plans.

By the time that children enter formal education they need to be self-confident, well-adjusted and ready to learn. Does the Minister agree that child care settings should be used to ensure that children gain the personal and social skills that they need to succeed at school, and that high-quality early years provision could in due course help to reduce antisocial behaviour in teenagers? Does the Minister agree that the quality of child care is even more important than supply, eligibility and cost, on which the debate usually focuses?

There is huge consensus across the Chamber today, but I am waiting for the Opposition to tell us whether they would match their intent with resources. Of course I agree with the hon. Lady that readiness for school is not just about the cognitive skills that we want children to develop but their social skills, emotional well-being and physical well-being. The joy of this Labour Government initiative to provide those services around the needs of the child is that we are beginning to see evidence from all those indicators that children are better prepared for school. I concur completely with her that if we develop all those facilities, children are far less likely to display antisocial behaviour later in life.

The hon. Lady talks about the quality of child care, which is very important, but we must bear in mind quality, supply and affordability. There is huge demand out there from many parents for high-quality, affordable child care and we must build that infrastructure as quickly as we can. High-quality child care is what makes all the difference to the child, and that is foremost in our minds.

Regrettably, in Scarborough and Whitby, the consensus that we have heard in the Chamber is not mirrored in the behaviour of the Conservative borough council—not a local education authority—which is in the process of withdrawing the current children's centre provision. Can the Minister give some priority to examining the problems that will face my constituents in the deprived areas in which she and the Government want to invest, so that we can make good the massive mistake that the Conservative council in Scarborough is about to make?

I am sorry to hear what my hon. Friend says about his local authority.

If we are to deliver a really effective early years and child care infrastructure, we must deliver it through local authorities. Our whole agenda represents a huge vote of confidence in local government, but we depend on our local authority partners to deliver. We can provide the resources and support, but they must deliver.

This is a popular policy, as is clear from what has been said here today. I think my hon. Friend's district council would be extremely unpopular if it did not provide these services: it would be letting children down, and not giving them a good enough future. We will highlight the authorities that do good work, as well as those that fail to deliver for children and families in their communities.

How many parents did not secure their first choice of school in the last year for which figures are available. [194099]

The House will be pleased to know that research into secondary school admissions by Sheffield Hallam university and the Office for National Statistics shows that 96 per cent. of parents were offered places at schools for which they had expressed a preference, and 92 per cent. were offered places at schools that the admissions authority thought was their first preference.

As the Minister will know, the number of appeals by parents who have not been given places at the school of their choice has increased by 50 per cent. under this Labour Government, and a recent survey showed that some 70,000 parents moved house between April and September last year in an attempt to get their children into their chosen school. Why will the Minister not abolish the surplus places rule, and also ensure that schools have more freedom to take more children if they choose?

It is a fine day when the Opposition's central policy is to abolish a rule that does not exist. There is no surplus places rule. Opposition Front Benchers' idea that they will make their way into government by abolishing something that was actually abolished by this Government's predecessor really does beggar belief.

Does the Minister agree with the Select Committee on Education and Skills that the Government's rhetoric on school choice is entirely incompatible with the withdrawal of free school transport proposed in the School Transport Bill, which will be debated later today? Does he accept that, in response to a parliamentary question about what the Government had done for school choice, a Minister revealed that they had funded the expansion of only four popular schools? Would it not be better for the Government to adopt the Conservative policy, scrap the School Transport Bill and introduce a right to choose, so that 100,000 extra parents could be given places at their first choice of school?

We will be discussing the Bill later, but I can tell the hon. Gentleman what does not increase choice. It does not increase choice to take £1 billion and put it in the private sector for an assisted places scheme. It does not increase choice to allow primary as well as secondary schools to choose their pupils. And it certainly does not increase choice to stop schools using distance as a criterion for entry. What sort of madness is that?

Does the Minister not recognise the considerable sense of injustice felt by parents whose children are denied admission to local community schools as their first choice because of outer-borough pupils coming in under the Greenwich judgment? Following the failure of the Camden compromise proposals in the High Court, will his Department take responsibility for coming up with alternative proposals?

Of course I sympathise with any parent whose child is not given a place at the school of his or her choice, but I am sure the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that—especially in London, which has 32 boroughs—there will be a series of cross-borough movements by pupils whose nearest schools are across a boundary. I am not sure that his simplistic solution would work.

How many secondary school closures there have been in Essex in the last five years. [194100]

I understand that in the last five years Essex county council has closed one secondary school, but that it was immediately replaced by a new voluntary-aided Church of England school on the same site.

Does the Minister accept that Canvey Island children—excellent children, generally—need more facilities, and a greater focus on education? Does he agree with me, and with the excellent county councillor, Ray Howard, that there should be no proposal from Essex county council that would threaten one of our three excellent secondary schools on Canvey Island—not least because of the increased pupil numbers that would result from the 4,000 extra houses that the Government are forcing on it? [Interruption.]

I am being heckled by my hon. Friends behind me and by the Liberal Democrats to remind the House that the council in question is a Conservative council, but I was not going to make a party political point in response to the hon. Gentleman's perfectly legitimate constituency matter. I am aware that the authority is in the middle of consultation, and we have received his representations, and representations from at least one parent in his constituency, on this matter. He will understand that I cannot comment beyond that, because this matter has to be decided at local level.

If he will make a statement on grading of advanced level examinations. [194101]

The Government play no role in the grading of external examinations. That is the responsibility of the regulatory authorities and the awarding bodies. The final report of the working group on 14-to-19 reform makes a number of recommendations regarding the future grading and reporting of achievement at advanced level. We will address these proposals in detail in the form of a White Paper early in the new year.

Will my hon. Friend assure me and the House that he will in no circumstances reintroduce the unfair and disgraceful quota pass system?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. I find it hard to believe that anyone would want to go back to a system of setting quotas for those who can gain A-levels. We are interested in quality, not quotas. Surely, in a modern democracy, the basis for any public examination is that if someone meets the agreed standard, they pass. That is why the quota system was abolished by one of the intellectual architects of what used to pass for modern conservatism, the then Secretary of State for Education, Sir Keith Joseph.

I know that my hon. Friend has a constituency similar to mine, in which levels of educational attainment at A-level and other levels are very low. In South Kirby, on my patch, 49 per cent. of the people have no qualifications at all, either at A-level or any other. In Featherstone, the figure is 47 per cent. These figures are obviously very poor. Does the Minister agree that we should be enhancing education provision in such constituencies? In that context, will he look carefully at the actions of the university of Leeds, which is now actively withdrawing facilities in the city of Wakefield, thereby depriving my constituents and others of educational opportunities?

I will certainly look into the activities of Leeds university on the Wakefield campus, and I hope that my hon. Friend will allow me to come back to him on that matter.

What assessment he has made of the likely impact of changes to the school admissions system made by local education authorities. [194102]

The introduction of co-ordinated admission arrangements will make the admissions process smoother and easier for parents, who will be able to express all their school preferences on a single application form. It will put a stop to the current situation, in which some parents hold offers from two or more schools while others have none. It will instead ensure that all parents receive a single offer of a school place on the same date.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Given his earlier reply to my hon. Friend the Member for South-West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous), I know that he will be well aware that the surplus places rule still operates in practice, not least in the form of the guidance that the Government issue to local education authorities. As all four of the secondary schools in my constituency are now effectively full, will the Government rescind the surplus places rule to allow good schools to expand? That is exactly what parents want.

As the Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Enfield, Southgate (Mr. Twigg), said earlier, five of the first 11 questions today have been from hon. Members representing Essex. The Essex men have been busy, and I congratulate them. There are 600,000 spare places in the education system around the country, and it is precisely to take account of the situation in places such as Essex that we have made it much easier for successful and popular schools to expand, supported by a dedicated pot of capital expenditure. As the applications come in, they will be treated very sympathetically, precisely to allow that to happen. I must point out to the hon. Gentleman, however, that some schools do not want to expand, because they think they are the right size already.

The Minister says that the new arrangements will make the process smoother and easier for parents, but does he know how stressful it is for parents and children? In the Ribble valley, parents have to put down all four of their choices, including the grammar school, as No. 1. If their youngsters fail to get through the examination process, not only do they not get their second, third or fourth choice but they are offered a place in a school many miles away in another borough. That is completely wrong. Would it not be far better to allow the youngsters to try the exams first and, if they failed, to offer them a place at another excellent local comprehensive school, rather than carting them off to a school many miles outside the area?

What the hon. Gentleman is proposing is that some children from some families should have two choices, or two bites of the cherry, while other children should only get one. The new system, which has been carefully tested in a range of authorities, has led to less stress, not more. There is a single form on which applications are made and a single date on which all parents get the results. The hon. Gentleman shakes his head, but if he writes to me with any details, we will look into them carefully. This is the first year of the new system rolling out nation wide. We are happy to assess how the system works in practice, but I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the reports that we are receiving suggest that the system is now much smoother, not more difficult.

Has the Minister followed the coverage of the case of a single mother in Labour-controlled Reading who feels that her son's chance of a good education has been compromised by the introduction of a ranked preference scheme? Why did the Secretary of State allow that option to be made available to local education authorities, when his own code says that that variant

"may therefore lead to less parental satisfaction overall, where there is significant variability in schools' popularity and/or quality"?

Does it not demonstrate yet again that, when it comes to school choice, the Government are all talk and no action?

The Government's record suggests the opposite. We have moved from a position in which 450 schools were getting fewer than 25 per cent. of young people up to five A to C grades at GCSE to one in which about 60 per cent. are gaining those grades. Any talk from the Conservatives about how choice has been reduced is a load of nonsense. I have not seen the "Reading Advertiser" from which the hon. Gentleman got this particular story, but I am happy to talk to my good and hon. Friend the Member for Reading, East (Jane Griffiths), to find out more about the details.

What the average standard spending assessment per secondary pupil is for (a) England and (b) Cornwall; and what the equivalent figures were in 1996–97. [194103]

In 2004–05 the average formula spending share for secondary pupils in England is £3,106 per pupil. In Cornwall, it is £2,935 per pupil. Because of changes to the funding system, I cannot provide the equivalent figures for 1996–97, but the total recurrent funding for pupils aged 3 to 19 has increased in Cornwall in real terms by £830 per pupil since 1997–98, compared with £940 per pupil nationally.

The Minister will be aware that part of the reason why the spend per pupil is so much lower in Cornwall than the national average is the area cost adjustment, which gives more money to what are regarded as higher income areas in London and the surrounding area. Would he rule out taking that even further and basing the system on a direct relationship to local wages, which would leave Cornwall, which has the lowest wages in the country, with the lowest funding in the country? That is precisely the system that his colleagues in the Department of Health are bringing in for hospital funding.

I am not aware of any suggestion to move to such a system for the funding of local education authorities. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about the ACA. He will be aware that the existence of a threshold is a provision that actually benefits Cornwall. Without that threshold, the position would be worse than the one that he described. The ACA is updated each year to reflect some of the changes that are taking place in local labour market patterns and we have undertaken, as part of our five-year strategy, to look again at the funding formula, and consultation on it will begin early next year.

Any analysis of standard spending assessments on secondary school pupils would show that my area of Barnsley is consistently below the national average. That discrepancy is hampering the efforts that we making in Barnsley to improve standards and results. I ask the Minister to look yet again into spending on Barnsley to establish whether we could be brought up at least to somewhere around the national average.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. What we are seeking to do through the national formula is to have a system under which a pupil receives the identical level of funding wherever he or she goes to school. That has brought about significant improvement in the system, but clearly there is always room for discussion about whether we are getting it quite right. That is why, as I said in my previous answer, consultation will start in early spring 2005 on how the formula should work in the medium and longer term.

What problems have been reported to his Department concerning the new software available to local education authorities for the administration of student grants. [194105]

I am informed that, following early teething problems, the new Protocol system for administering student support has now stabilised and is doing the job as intended, processing and paying out funds to higher education students from England and Wales. Most LEAs are now processing applications within the standard six weeks. We have also invoked contingency action to release interim payments to existing students who applied by the deadline but whose assessment could not be completed by the start of term.

I appreciate that acknowledgement of relative failure, but does the Minister agree with officers in my authority who say that the main problem relates to the need to interact with a centralised system by telephone lines across the country more or less simultaneously everywhere, causing the system to be slow, to go offline and to leave valuable staff twiddling their thumbs? Does he recognise the problem, and has he consulted my authority on how to rectify it?

There were problems, but they have now been largely ironed out. The root of the trouble has often been LEA systems not being correctly configured to accommodate Protocol. Having spent many happy hours back in the early 1990s on the Public Accounts Committee, looking at how lots of agencies and Government bodies did not quite get their computer systems right, I am very much aware that they are very delicate beings and we are often over-ambitious in the way in which we use them. I have been assured, however, that this is up and running and working relatively well.

What assessment he has made of the contribution made by adult residential colleges to lifelong learning. [194106]

These colleges provide valuable opportunities for those who get pleasure and personal fulfilment from learning, particularly older people. The publicly funded provision of individual Adult Residential Colleges Association colleges has to be planned and agreed between the college and the local learning and skills councils. At a national level, discussions are taking place between ARCA and the Learning and Skills Council on the future position of the colleges.

I share my hon. Friend's high regard for the colleges. Members of the Adult Residential Colleges Association tell me that they are very keen to contribute to the Government's agenda on lifelong learning. Commendably, they are concerned about their fees structure excluding some people who would wish to take part. Is he willing to meet members of ARCA to discuss a national strategic approach to creating social inclusion in the work that they do?

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend's effective advocacy on behalf of the colleges. I agree absolutely that there is a case for looking at them in a national context to recognise the contribution that they make to the lifelong learning agenda. I will be absolutely delighted to meet him and members of the association in the very near future.

How many higher education students are waiting to receive their student loans for the current academic year. [194108]

Of the 807,000 applications received so far, only 73,000 are still being processed, all of which were received after the published deadlines. Local authorities and the Student Loans Company have never been able to guarantee payment at the start of term to late applicants. Where necessary, we have invoked contingency action to release interim payments to existing students who applied by the deadline but whose assessment could not be completed by the start of term. As in previous years, the Department has written to higher education institutions asking them to be supportive of students who do not have loans in place at the start of term.

The Minister says that students who applied on time will have got their money, and indeed the latest news on the Department's website, dated 8 September, still says that those who applied on time should get their money by the start of term; yet my constituent, Jackie Benny, has written to me to say that her daughter is still waiting—although she has at last received the interim payment of £1,000 this week—does not know how much she will get overall, and is being pressured by the college to make the payments. Will he increase pressure on colleges to ensure that they treat students sympathetically, and will he also do more work with the LEAs that are having problems—there are lots in Norfolk—in getting the applications processed on time?

As I understand it, Norfolk county council is one of the LEAs that has been experiencing particular difficulties with processing. Interim payments have been made—I am glad that the hon. Gentleman's constituent's daughter has received hers—but I undertake to find out precisely where the difficulty has arisen.

What his policy is on the funding of small schools on more than one site. [194109]

The funding of split-site schools is a matter for the local education authority to determine. Authorities have considerable freedom to decide on the detail of their school funding formulae and they are able to include factors that provide additional funding for small schools, including those that operate on split sites.

There are undoubtedly difficulties with federated small schools with single management but two completely separate sites, although that is often the right answer for very small village schools. One of the problems is the funds that are now supplied directly from Whitehall to schools, because they do not take into account the higher running costs and higher capital costs for schools that operate on two separate sites. Will the Minister look at the situation again? I accept the fact that some responsibility lies with the LEA: I can take that up with Somerset LEA, but I ask him to take the issue up with his officials.

Our responsibility is to ensure that the funding system provides sufficient flexibility and funding to all local authorities to take account of the particular needs in their area. Our intelligence was that the hon. Gentleman intended to raise a particular issue in his question. I thought that he was going to congratulate the Government on the help that they have given to Somerset county council in respect of St. Mary and St. Peter's first school. Since he has not, I am very happy to do so. I am sure that the House will be pleased to hear about the split-site allowance of £11,180, and the curriculum protection for a school with sites in two villages of £44,081 that have been allocated to the school. Those figures suggest to me that the system is working, at least in some respect.

What plans the Crown Prosecution Service has to assist in tackling the intimidation and harassment of witnesses. [194083]

The "no witness, no justice" programme will enable the Crown Prosecution Service to give greater support to victims and witnesses who are at risk of intimidation or harassment. In order to protect witnesses, those responsible for intimidation or harassment can be prosecuted. Prosecutors can apply for defendants to be remanded in custody or be subject to bail conditions, and the courts can order that they sit in private if that is necessary to enable witnesses to give their best evidence.

My right hon. and learned Friend will be aware that in many close-knit communities, such as former mining communities like the Rhondda, issues of harassment and intimidation of witnesses can come very high on the list of miseries created in the criminal justice system for many ordinary, decent families. Can the CPS get involved with the police—and the local authority, in the case of antisocial behaviour orders—from the beginning of the process to ensure that witnesses and victims stand a real chance of seeing it reach a just conclusion?

In respect of antisocial behaviour action, the prosecutors form part of the team and will work with the police and the local authority, and with Victim Support. We also have to be sure that as well as providing the right level of support for victims and witnesses, we allow defendants the opportunity to put their case and defend themselves.

The principle that justice should be done in public and fully reported occasionally has to be tempered by the need to protect victims and witnesses. That is so not only in criminal cases, but in family law proceedings, especially those involving children. What guidelines have been given to the CPS in relation to victim or witness anonymity and curtailing of reporting rights, and are any further guidelines proposed?

In relation to the criminal courts, the principle is that the courts should be as open as possible. Justice should not only be done, but be seen to be done. Issues should be tried in public. If it is necessary to place restrictions on that general principle to enable witnesses to give their best evidence, prosecutors can apply for several special measures. The hon. Gentleman mentioned other jurisdictions, and indeed I recently issued a written statement about an amendment to the Children Bill. In the family courts, the general rule is that they sit in private—the opposite of the criminal courts—unless it is ordered that a hearing should be open. We needed to amend that to bring increased openness and accountability so as to build public confidence in family proceedings.

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that dealing with witness intimidation will be essential to the success of the new north Liverpool community justice centre? What plans does she have to deal with that important issue?

We all think that the Liverpool community justice centre is a really important step forward, and I take this opportunity to congratulate my hon. Friend, her parliamentary colleagues and all those who have worked to get the centre up and running. We hope it will be very successful. The key is to ensure that problems are identified early on, the concerns of victims and witnesses are understood and appropriate action is taken.

In the context of encouraging witnesses to come forward and participate in the court process, I am sure that the Solicitor-General will agree that one of the key elements is reassurance that the Crown Prosecution Service will take them and their cases seriously, and that much good can be done if the CPS is seen as a fearless champion of the public interest in prosecuting offenders. In that context, what sort of message is sent out when a 63-year-old farmer in Norfolk, Mr. David Key, arrests two individuals in his farmyard in the act of siphoning off petrol, one of them allegedly admits his participation in the offence, yet a CPS spokesman says that it will not proceed on the basis that

"The property involved was not of great value. A decision has to be made if it was worth while to bring a prosecution bearing in mind the chances of getting a conviction"?

Will the Solicitor-General see that the matter is looked into urgently? What sort of message does it send out to witnesses and those who fear intimidation—

Order. That supplementary is far too wide of the original question.

How many names of counsel are on the panels maintained for Government legal work; and how other counsel may have their name added to those panels. [194084]

The Attorney-General maintains panels of counsel to undertake civil and criminal work for all Departments. There are 307 counsel on the civil panels and 578 on the criminal panels.

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that answer. I do not suggest that the Government are unduly litigious, but they spend substantial amounts of public, taxpayers' money on legal services, so does she accept that there is an obligation to ensure that there is fair access for those who have the talents and qualities to undertake such work, including newly qualified barristers and—dare I say it—solicitor advocates?

My hon. Friend is right. We need to get two things right: to ensure that the Government have the best legal advice and advocacy when they are involved in legal proceedings; and that access to the interesting and important work of representing the Government in court and giving them legal advice is fair and open. As he says, that work is well paid. It also provides opportunities for those doing it to go into the judiciary. Perhaps I can take this opportunity to pay tribute to my predecessor, Lord Falconer, who took the process from being a bit of an old boys' network and made sure that it was fair and open.

Whether the Crown Prosecution Service has a role in the antisocial behaviour order procedure. [194085]

What advice she has given to the Crown Prosecution Service about the prosecution of people who breach antisocial behaviour orders. [194086]

The Crown Prosecution Service considers whether an antisocial behaviour order application is appropriate following a relevant conviction and, if so, makes a request to the court. The CPS is also responsible for prosecuting breaches of antisocial behaviour orders. Full guidance on the law and practice regarding those orders, including the prosecution of breaches, was issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions to all Crown prosecutors and caseworkers in April 2004.

I very much welcome the role of the CPS in that regard, and the appointment of a dedicated prosecutor for Merseyside. I invite my right hon. and learned Friend to welcome both the recently announced witness protection measures for those reporting incidents of antisocial behaviour and the announcement today that Wirral is to have more power given to its elbow to tackle that scourge of my constituents by being appointed as an ASB action area.

I thank my hon. Friend for those points. As he said, a specialist prosecutor is covering his area—Iain Criddle, who has been described in local newspapers as the antisocial behaviour tsar. I am not sure that I would go as far as that, but he is working for the CPS with a team of people to deal with the problems that my hon. Friend raised.

To some extent, ASBOs, curfews and dispersal orders work very well, and Essex police used them to great effect on Canvey Island this year. However, does the right hon. and learned Lady accept that the CPS and the courts should use the toughest possible action to deal with breaches of ASBOs, and that generally they should send offenders to prison? In that way, they would send out the right message and make sure that ASBOs' effectiveness continues to improve.

The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point when he says that it is important that breaches of orders on antisocial behaviour made by the court should be dealt with effectively, so that confidence that the orders mean what they say can be sustained. Sentencing is a matter for the courts.

My right hon. and learned Friend will agree that ASBOs have played an important part in curtailing trouble in areas, but does she not agree that the press has a right to print the names of people for whom application for such an order has been successful? Does not the press also have the right to ensure that people are aware when an ASBO has been breached?

The press has a right to report anything that the law does not expressly prohibit.

What supervisory responsibilities the Attorney-General has for the law as it relates to service personnel. [194087]

The service prosecuting authorities are subject to the general superintendence of the Attorney-General. Regular meetings are held with the service prosecuting authorities, especially the Army prosecuting authority. I refer the House to the statement that I made on 15 June, in which I set out the Law Officers' responsibilities for prosecutions of people subject to military law.

What is the mechanism for calling in a case for trial in the civilian courts? Is the commanding officer obliged to follow the advice of the Army prosecuting authority? If he does not follow that advice, is the case automatically referred to the Attorney-General?

The vast majority of offences committed by Army personnel are dealt with by courts martial, following investigation by the military police. In some cases, notably serious ones, there is concurrent jurisdiction. That means that a matter could be tried either in a court martial or in a Crown court. Normally, the most appropriate jurisdiction is agreed between the CPS and the Army prosecution authority. If there is no such agreement, it is for the Attorney-General to decide in which jurisdiction the matter should be tried.