Education and Inspections Bill

My Lords, this has been a long and wide-ranging debate with many expert contributions, including some from several former Secretaries of State. I have appeared before several of them to plead for more money for my local authority, with greater success with some than others. At this time of night it is difficult to find anything fresh to say about the Bill. Perhaps as a leader of a local authority, and following the comments of the previous speaker, I may have a different perspective. I am proud of the achievements of my local authority. I was pleased that in September the Minister was able to come to Wigan and see the good relationship we have with our schools and what we have achieved for our pupils in partnership with those schools. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Sutherland, that in England most of the money now goes directly to schools. Wicked local authorities do not get their hands on it to do anything untoward with it. My concern is that the Government will continue to fund schools in Wigan to the extent that we funded them when in control, because we have always spent above the allocation. The Bill demonstrates the Government’s commitment to improving education performance. In his introductory speech my noble friend demonstrated his passion for that. While we share the same objective, my attitude to the Bill is perhaps reflected in my views on England’s World Cup campaign—I support the objectives and we are doing better than last year, but some things still give me cause for concern. One of those is accountability. I know there is tension between delivering good-quality public services and accountability at a local level, but much in what I see in public services does not demonstrate that centralisation produces a better result than local control. Indeed, in part of my absence from the debates today I went to a meeting of the All-Party Group on Local Government. The group was presented with a new pamphlet entitled Whitehall to Town Hall: Strengthening Democratic Choice. There is a very interesting YouGov report that shows that only 8 per cent of people want to see public services passed to quangos, and to businesses slightly more than that. The highest proportion wants local councillors to continue to run the service, so we need to think very carefully about the changes. I share many of the views expressed so eloquently by my noble friends Lord Kinnock and Lady Morris of Yardley. I do not want to repeat what they said. I accept that there is a need to change. The noble Lord, Lord Dearing, reminded us that we are failing many of the pupils. The Minister gave us the information—only 44 per cent of pupils get good passes at GCSE but, interestingly enough, only 18 per cent of those on free school meals do so. There is the rub. We need to worry about that. It is reflected not just in income, but is a combination of social factors which have a profound effect on education performance. However we tinker with the structure, unless we get to grips with some of those issues we will not improve the performance of our children. That reflects attitudes to learning. It is not always valued. It may be shocking to this House, but not all families think that education is a good thing. Look at the difference in performance between boys and girls. The gender gap persists because boys do not see the value of education. Some parents cannot give children as much support as others, and they may not be able to recognise when children are not performing well in schools or articulate to the school what they feel needs to be done. As the Bill progresses, we need to ensure that aspirations—because that is what it is about—are reflected. If I disagree fundamentally with one sentence in the White Paper, it is that:"““Parents have high aspirations for their children and understandably place high demands on schools””." If that were the case, our task would be relatively simple, but it is not so. It is not that many parents have no concern for their children, but many do not understand the difference that their support can make. When my daughter was in primary school, her best friend at the time was a very bright young girl but, because her family did not give her any support in education, she did worse and worse and is now, I think, working on the counter at Asda. She could have gone to university. I recognise that the Government have done much in their support through Sure Start and all the interventions in early years, but that is still not enough. We need to ensure that local authorities have the role of supporting families. I was pleased that one of the first duties on local authorities in the Bill is to promote the fulfilment of educational potential. It is very important that local authorities take that on board. We need to examine whether the Bill gives local authorities sufficient powers to enable them to carry out those really important duties. Also, I question whether the provision is broad enough. I would like to see the development of other talents—I may be concerned about future World Cup squads, but there is more to life than education. I also welcome the provision for the promotion of recreation and leisure facilities for young people. I reiterate the comments made by several noble Lords that we should recognise the work of the youth service. We do not want the youth service in England not to have statutory recognition when it is there in Wales and will be in Scotland. That is very important. I am not too concerned about too many schools going independent. No school in Wigan took the bribes on offer under the grant-maintained schools programme, because they valued the work that they could do with local authorities as part of a family working with each other. If there is nothing on offer here, what is the incentive? Local authorities will still be major providers of education. We need to reflect on that and ensure that in this Bill we are not undermining the ability of local authorities to provide community schools where they are necessary. One issue that has not been raised in this House but which is important is that schools are more than just educational centres. They are at the heart of local communities. In many communities, the school is the only example of public investment. We need to ensure that schools have an influence on their area and are influenced by the neighbourhood in which they work. We have used school sites to provide facilities such as all-weather playing surfaces, which the schools can use during the daytime and the community and local clubs can use in the evenings and at weekends. I am proud of one project in my authority which is nearing completion, where we are building a new primary school to replace two Victorian primary schools—which have reduced numbers in any case—together with a local library and a health centre. Not only is that joint project cost-effective, but it engages the school and the local community. We need to ensure that that continues. If we want such joint ventures to continue to be effective, as well as ensuring that schools are engaged in the wider community agenda, we need to place a duty on schools to co-operate with other public agencies. Most schools will of course co-operate, and for them the provision will be unnecessary. However, some schools and some heads do not quite understand that engaging with the community and working with local people is not at the expense of educational achievement; it enhances it. Finally, I think the Government have changed somewhat on this matter, which has improved the Bill. The Bill is better than the White Paper, and the Bill that has come to us is better than the Bill that went to the Commons. The Government have listened to comments made on the Bill, and I hope that the Minister will reflect on some of the comments that he has heard today. I am sure that he will continue to listen to the points being made. As the Bill goes to another place and emerges as an Act, I am sure that it will eventually achieve the objectives that we all share of improving educational performance. It is vital, not only for our young people and our communities but for the nation, that we ensure that we have a well educated nation that is able to compete on the world stage.