Education and Inspections Bill

Robert Key (Salisbury) (Con): I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron), the Leader of the Opposition, on recognising that this is a special Bill that deserves our support for all the right reasons, as well as some very good reasons that are more political. I also congratulate the Secretary of State and her Ministers on producing a Bill that has depth and vision and which deserves support right across the House.

When I decided to become a teacher, the first class that I faced before I did my postgraduate certificate was in a secondary modern school. I was horrified at the poverty of aspiration in the people in that school, from the teachers and parents to the children. That experience motivated me strongly to believe that we had to do something about the problem. During the course of that year, I passed a term at Leeds grammar school, and a more traditional and excellent school one could not find anywhere in the 1960s.

I am glad to say that, because my first full-time education was in Scotland, I am a Scottish-registered teacher. I recognised within about five minutes an enormous difference between the approach to education in Scotland and, in particular, the approach in England in the 1960s. During my 16-year education career, I also learned an enormous amount—as a governor of schools in the old Inner London Education Authority—about education at all levels and for those of all ages. I realised how privileged I had been in my own education; I also realised what I wanted for my children and for other people's children.

When I look at the Bill, I recognise something a little bit special: it has vision. When I think back to Kenneth Baker's great Education Act 1988—I sat for many hours on the Standing Committee of what was known as the Gerbil—I also recognise that that was a landmark education Bill, and I suspect that this will be one too.

I regret that there is still such animosity towards grammar schools. We heard a moving speech from my hon. Friend the Member for South Antrim (Dr. McCrea) on the subject.

Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Robert Key: I certainly will not give way at this stage.

I also recognise, however, that in constituencies such as mine—we have excellent grammar schools, which both my daughters attended—there is not the animosity that there was 20 years ago. The grammar schools have changed, and all the other schools have changed. There is a mythology among Labour Members about hatred of grammar schools, which I think is wrong. I have a great admiration for the grammar school system throughout the country. Grammar schools make an enormous contribution and I hope that we shall see no diminution of support for them, although I do not believe that there will be any particular call for their re-establishment.

I looked carefully at clause 36 in case it was doing something of which I was not aware. I certainly would not support the Bill if it was going to abolish grammar schools, but I do not think that it will. I do not think that it says much more than was said in legislation a little earlier.

What I particularly like about the Bill is that it will do things for my rural constituency as well as other constituencies. I do not agree that it is a London-centric Bill, although I know that that worries many people. For instance, clause 7, entitled "Invitation for proposals for establishment of new schools", is right on for the problem that we face in rural constituencies such as mine. Following the Government's "Building Schools for the Future" initiative and the one-school pathfinder project, my local education authority was told, "Here is £20 million: build us a new secondary school." There was then a frantic competition. The LEA had to choose one secondary school among dozens that needed rebuilding. Last week, my constituency lost out—for all the wrong reasons. It was not that we do not need new secondary schools; we need at least two rebuilt secondary schools, or completely new schools. Good luck to Melksham: it won and we lost. It should not be like that, however, and I think that the Bill will enable us to overcome such failures in the system.

I am also delighted that school transport is being tackled in a more constructive way for the first time. I particularly like clause 11, "Establishment of school as a federated school". We have huge problems in rural schools, especially primary schools. We simply cannot go on having little village schools with 40, 50 or 60 children when more than 50 per cent. of children are brought in, unsustainably, in 4X4s from the surrounding market towns because their parents happen to like a particular school with a particular head teacher at a particular time, and it is a brilliant school. I do not want us to experience the traumas that we experienced in the village of Farley last year, or those that we are experiencing in the village of Redlynch this year. I want to see an approach like that in the village of Broadchalke, where there is to be one big school that will look after the needs of a large number of villages in the Chalke valley west of Salisbury.

Clauses 14 and 15 deal with the discontinuance of schools maintained by LEAs and with consultation. I am delighted at the recognition that the LEAs must consult the district council, the parish council and

"such persons as appear to them to be appropriate".

That is constructive, although there are some omissions. There are issues that I should like to see tackled. I shall be told that that is not possible, but I do not think we are taking enough account of the needs of service schools. Thousands of the children of our service men and women are served very well by the service schools education authority. The Education Select Committee is not allowed to investigate service schools because they are a matter for the Ministry of Defence, and I am glad to say, as a member of the Defence Select Committee, that we are going to investigate service education. However, I would have been more comfortable with a joined-up government approach.

I turn to a fundamental issue, to which a number of Members have referred: the crying need for education in science and technology from year one of our children's school careers. I shudder when I hear about any more involvement with creationism—as if it can be taken seriously. We are told that this is only a comparative study and that it will never happen; nevertheless, I remain worried.

Mr. Jamie Reed (Copeland) (Lab): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Robert Key: Forgive me, but I will not give way; I want to keep absolutely to the time limit.

I worry about the teaching of creationism and I am strong believer in the need for more science and technology education. One of the great strengths of the school system in my constituency, which has everything from grammar schools to large and thriving comprehensives, is that it recognises the education and careers needs of the local community and, above all, the value of education for its own sake in terms of the quality of life of our young people and the good of our country in the long run. I shall happily support this Bill tonight.