---

Schools Funding (Cornwall)

Although I will return to some issues about Cornwall council, the whole context of my argument at this point is that the Government have been sympathetic to investment in education, as have we—the Liberal Democrats argued for that. The Government have sought to address the problem of disadvantaged pupils, but primarily in the context of urban disadvantage, and they have simply not delivered to small rural disadvantaged communities. For example, the dedicated school grant contains no protection for maintaining small schools and class sizes in the circumstances that I have described, with the result that for Cornwall council some £10 million is allocated in small school protection to deliver quality and to maintain village schools, but that is not supported directly by Government funding. Huge financial pressure falls directly on Cornwall council. My hon. Friend the Member for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson) described clearly the benefits of such schools, and I have described the costs. I also described the gap between the level of funding that we receive and the national average, let alone the level of funding received in urban areas of deprivation, which is vastly higher than the national average. The shortfall is not just against the national average; it is even more against similarly deprived communities in different circumstances. Compared with the national average, the shortfall in school funding is about £24 million every year. That is the difference between what we would receive and what we do receive as a result of the funding formula. That formula is essentially unchanged since it was designed by the last Conservative Government. That is the context in which Cornwall council is starting to move towards what I fear will be closure of some schools and a severe hit on the budgets of some smaller schools. Already, funding changes are being made, which will take money from some smaller schools and make them even more vulnerable to closure. I suggest that there is a better solution. One element is cash, for which I look to the Government, and the other is a more imaginative approach. I address that comment particularly to Cornwall council, but the Government could show leadership. I plead with the next Government, whether a Labour Government or a change of Government, to review the central factor of the formula. My party has just announced changes to introduce a pupil premium, which would be worth just over £20 million a year to Cornwall and would address directly the funding gap, but it would be targeted at disadvantage and provide an extra premium for all pupils from impoverished backgrounds such that they are eligible for free school meals. That would effectively provide an extra £2,500 for each pupil. I know the difference that that would make in schools throughout Cornwall, particularly those with a disadvantaged intake. I spent a day working in Whitemoor school a year or so ago, and I saw direct the issues that it had to tackle and the amount of time and effort needed from classroom assistants and teachers simply to get pupils to the point of learning. That pupil premium would make a real difference, but whether that or another approach is right, rural poverty and deprivation is a fundamental issue that must be addressed in the funding formula. It is time for a review. No funding system can fully address the extra cost of running smaller schools, so we must be innovative. When the Liberal Democrats were running Cornwall council, it pioneered approaches such as clustering schools to share administrative costs, providing packages to support head teachers to do their jobs effectively by operating across more than one school, and having specialist teachers across more than one school to provide expanded opportunities for pupils to interact with teachers with different specialist skills. Just because small schools are costly, we should not assume that there are no solutions. There are, and they are being implemented throughout the country. The easy option should not be taken when innovative solutions are available. I know that the Government have provided support for that, and I hope that the Minister will say clearly and loudly today that Cornwall council should continue to pursue innovation. Surplus places are a real issue in rural communities because they are scattered, and it is not possible to amalgamate three schools into two without an impact on the communities that they serve in a way that does not apply in urban communities. Again, the easy option of closing a small village school should not be taken. Such schools are the most costly and are relatively remote, so the easy option of redistributing pupils to larger schools in bigger communities may seem to solve the problem, but it strips out from a village an essential part of its community. It is more difficult to tackle surplus places in urban areas and in oversized schools, and it is tempting to take the quick and easy option of closing a smaller school, but I plead with Cornwall council and the Government to find a more imaginative solution. The first question should not be, "What do we do about a school that does not have sufficient pupils?" We should ask why it does not have sufficient pupils, and there are usually two core reasons. First, it may have acquired a less than good reputation, so the solution is not to shut it down, but to do something about what has gone wrong with its quality. When a small school that is reliant on one, two or three teachers goes wrong, it goes wrong comprehensively, but in a larger school part of it may continue to function well because of the large range of staff. Equally, putting things right can be done comprehensively more easily than in a larger school. Pupil numbers may have fallen because parents are not choosing it, which is usually because they know something that may not yet have shown up in official statistics, and that should be put right. Secondly, families in rural communities can no longer afford to live in villages, so there are not enough children for the school, which may have nothing wrong with it. It may be of high quality and well supported by the community, but if there are not enough children, the initial response should be not to think about closing it down, but to think about what can be done to help families to live in a working community. More often than not, what is needed is affordable housing because people who work on farms, in plumbing and building, or in shops and pubs, are forced out of the community by the unaffordability of homes. The best solution for keeping village schools open is to deliver affordable homes in small communities—often just six, eight or 10 are needed—to allow local families to continue to live and work there. That approach is different. It stops asking the question, "What shall we close down to sort out the problem of surplus places?" and asks, "How can we maintain vibrant communities with successful schools in our more impoverished, small rural communities where it is expensive to live and where there may be surplus school places?" I hope that the Government will take that approach, and I hope that the Minister will take the opportunity today to recommend it to Cornwall council.