Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Stephen Twigg (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 22 July 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Academies Bill [Lords].


Academies Bill [Lords]

The difference on this occasion is that the schools affected have worked for years on a programme for their own improvement, and they came together in Building Schools for the Future. Now that has all been stopped, except for schools that will potentially have academy status. The problem is the uncertainty. I want schools to make the decisions that are best for them. The head of De La Salle wants his school to be an academy and sees the educational advantages, whereas the head teacher and chair of governors of Holly Lodge, another school that was due to be rebuilt under Building Schools for the Future, have decided that they do not want that for their school. I do not want schools to make such decisions simply on the basis of whether the extra money is available. I wish briefly to make a point about where we go from here. Although there is a real sense of loss and devastation in Liverpool that we are not getting Building Schools for the Future funding, there is also a hard-headed pragmatism. We recognise that there will be a new show in town, and we are starting to consider what the alternatives might be for securing the much-needed capital funding for the city.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
514 c617 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disability Admissions Costs Buildings Finance Education Facilities Local government Ministerial powers Property transfer Property Pupils Primary education Standards Special educational needs Secondary education Academies Building schools for the future programme Young People's Learning Agency Free schools
Legislation
Academies Bill (HL) 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk