---

Schools Funding (Cornwall)

If I do not answer any of the questions asked by the hon. Member for Truro and St. Austell (Matthew Taylor), perhaps he will intervene, and perhaps his two hon. Friends will do the same. I congratulate him on securing this debate, and note the attendance of his hon. Friends the Members for North Cornwall (Dan Rogerson) and for Falmouth and Camborne (Julia Goldsworthy). From the correspondence and press cuttings that I have seen, I know that the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends have campaigned tirelessly and worked hard to try to secure the best education outcome for young people and families in their area. Obviously, we take the issues raised by the hon. Gentleman seriously in Cornwall as in all other areas. The Government have invested heavily over the past 13 years, and before addressing the specific points, I would like to point out that we have seen a real-terms rise in per pupil funding in Cornwall of 38 per cent. since 1997. Following that, in 2005 we introduced the dedicated schools grant, which will increase 2008-09 levels by 12.8 per cent. to £4,043 per pupil in Cornwall by 2010-11. Added to that, Cornwall has benefited from around £100 million of capital investment over the current spending review period, including £18.5 million to support the delivery of the primary capital programme. The hon. Gentleman will also know of the exemplar project to rebuild Camelford school. The main thrust of the hon. Gentleman's speech was about the dedicated schools grant, notwithstanding the point about the pupil premium. He will know that the DSG is being reviewed, as we want to develop a new formula for the distribution of money from central Government to different areas from 2011. As he will know, a three-year period was specified and set out for 2008-09 to 2010-11, and we are looking to see how we can redistribute moneys from 2011 onwards in a way that is perhaps fairer than it is under the current system. We carried out a consultation, and certain principles arose from that on which we will consult again. For example, we must consider whether we give a single amount per pupil across the country, or whether we have activity-led funding and look to see how much each pupil costs in an area. One can then look at issues such as sparsity, deprivation, high-cost pupils and additional educational needs. One problem that the hon. Gentleman will have—as will hon. Members from all parties—is that while some of his colleagues argue for a fairer distribution of the money, that is actually something that would disadvantage him even further. That is true of all political parties. To find a fairer funding mechanism, where people do not simply go and see whether they get more or less from it, is difficult. I know Cornwall, and I know that the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues will have tried to influence the outcome of the review. However, I suggest that he continues writing to relevant Departments and putting pressure on them and on the local authority, to try to secure the fairest and best possible outcome for Cornwall. The review is ongoing, and there will be a further consultation on it in the next couple of weeks, to which he may wish to contribute.