Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Douglas Carswell (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 June 2006. It occurred during Adjournment debate on State Schools (Independence).


State Schools (Independence)

I cannot think of a single county in the country in which that would be the case if there were effective school independence and parental choice. However, I can think of a number of counties in which an extremely progressive curriculum is imposed with almost zero parental choice and almost zero freedom for schools to do differently. Under my scheme, we would get choice and a conservative outcome in terms of the content of the curriculum. Under the current system, there is a very non-conservative curriculum, and there is very little that parents can do about that. I am not here to argue for a return to grant-maintained schools. There were errors to do with the centralised system of funding in the grant-maintained system. Nor am I here to defend the local education authorities; under my scheme, I would be happy to see certain aspects of the LEAs wither away. Instead of centralising how local government manages its education budgets, we should try another, non-centralising way—a third way, if you like—of devolving control over school budgets. We could give every parent in the country the legal right to request and receive, in non-cash form, their share of their child’s local authority budget allocation. That share could be weighted by age, geography or indicators of social deprivation to ensure greater equity—I admit that. Allowing parents the legal right to request and receive their child’s share of the local authority budget could be done simply and would ensure that there was effective choice, which is lacking under the current system. It could be done through a relatively simple, straightforward two-line Bill in Parliament and judicial fiat. The courts could ensure that it took effect. What I suggest is not the same as some hideously complicated, centrally run, top-down national voucher scheme. Imagine the potential for IT failure under such a scheme; one has only to consider the history of some of the big Government IT projects to see what might happen. Nor do we need a new funding quango. That would enable future Governments of left or right to attach conditions to schools or parents for receipt of the funding. A simple legal right for parents to request and receive their share of local authority funding would solve the problem. In looking back at the history of the national curriculum and of a centralised system of funding for grant-maintained schools, we see clearly a lesson that we on the centre right need to learn: rigour and higher standards cannot be imposed top-down, but will come about through being driven from the bottom up. To ensure that that happens, we need not only to set schools free and give them greater independence, but to give parents effective choice.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
447 c29-30WH 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Admissions Curriculum Charitable trusts Local education authorities Public sector Schools
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk