Mr.
Hayes: The hon. Gentleman might be right to say that young
people want things to do, but he will know that in the last 15 years
almost half of the UK’s playing fields have disappeared. Many of
our conurbations and cities are becoming increasingly grey. It is okay
to say that young people have the will to do such things, but unless
there is the opportunity they will not be able to fulfil that
will.
Phil
Hope: Perhaps that will give me the opportunity to respond
to some of the points that the hon. Gentleman and others have made
about participation in sport and the availability of public playing
fields, although I hope not to stray far from the
clause. The Government
are firmly committed to competitive school sport. Learning competitive
games such as football and hockey is compulsory at all key stages, and
the percentage of young people taking part in competitive sport has
been rising steadily year on year. We have introduced new measures to
successfully promote participation in competitive sport. I have some
figures for the hon. Gentleman. Competitive sports such as football,
hockey and athletics remain popular and are offered by almost all
schools. For example, 97 per cent. of schools offer football, 91 per
cent. athletics, 85 per cent. cricket, 81 per cent. netball, 82 per
cent. rugby, 74 per cent. hockey and 71 per cent. tennis. That is a
high percentage of schools offering exactly the kind of competitive
school sports to which the hon. Gentleman
referred. The hon.
Gentleman mentioned inter-school sporting competition. In partnerships
that we developed in 2003-04 the level of participation has risen from
33 per cent. to 36 per cent. I am pleased to say that the figure is
going up. In a typical week, a quarter of pupils in partnership schools
are involved in inter-school competitive activities. That percentage
has risen from 22 to 28 per cent., an increase of six percentage
points. There has been a welcome growth in participation in competitive
sport. The subject of
playing fields has come up on a number of occasions. I shall briefly
mention some
facts.
Mr.
Hayes: I want to be absolutely clear on the figures that
the hon. Gentleman just offered us, because they are important in the
terms established by the hon. Member for Bury, North. The
Under-Secretary will correct me if I am wrong, but I think that he is
telling us that 28 per cent. of schools, up from 22 per cent., are
involved in inter-school competitions. Is that right? He then gave us
another figure of 36 per cent. I did not understand the difference
between those two. Will he clarify it? Whatever the clarification,
however, it seems to
me—
The
Chairman: Order. Let us wait for the
clarification.
Phil
Hope: The figures are for partnership schools in which
participation has taken place. I was talking about pupils, not
schools. I should like
to make it clear that the Government are investing some £978
million between 2003-04 and 2007-08 to deliver the PE, school sport and
club links strategy, which aims to increase young people’s
take-up of sporting opportunities. As for the figures on partnership
school pupils taking part, the 2004-05 school sport survey found that
69 per cent. of pupils in partnership schools spent at least two hours
in a typical week on high-quality PE and school sport. With the
addition of the lottery funding that is enhancing school facilities,
some £1.5 billion will have been invested in school sport during
the five years up to 2008. By any standards, that is a remarkable
achievement in promoting school sport.
Ms
Angela C. Smith: I wonder whether this is the right point
to pay tribute to our right hon. Friend the Minister for Sport, who has
been instrumental in securing much of that investment, which will
facilitate the implementation of the duties laid down in clause
6.
Phil
Hope: My hon. Friend is absolutely right to highlight our
right hon. Friend’s contribution. We can be proud not only of
the new duty, which will improve facilities and access for young
people, but of the wider opportunities for participation both in and
out of school in a wide range of sporting and cultural
activities.
Mr.
Hayes: The Under-Secretary has been extremely clear about
the kind of sports that young people are involved in—he gave us
a comprehensive breakdown of figures for each sport that he
listed—but I am still not quite clear about how many schools and
how many pupils, in percentage terms, are involved in competitive
sport. He has spoken about different percentages and different types of
schools. Can we have a clear answer on how many schools are competing
against one another, and what percentage of pupils is involved? If he
cannot give me that clear answer, perhaps he could come back to
me.
Phil
Hope: I shall try again. If this does not satisfy the hon.
Gentleman, I will write to
him. I listed the
percentage of schools offering each sport. I thought that that was a
helpful contribution. In the context of the sporting partnerships that
are being developed, I mentioned that 35 per cent. of pupils in those
partnership schools were involved in some form of inter-school sporting
competition. Well over a third are involved in some kind of sporting
competition. Questions
have been asked about school playing fields. Section 77 of the School
Standards and Framework Act 1998 delivered our commitment to ending the
policy of forcing schools to sell off playing fields. Since then, all
local authorities and governing bodies of maintained schools in England
have needed the Secretary of State’s consent to dispose of a
school playing field or any part of one. Since 2004, the assessment
criteria have been strengthened so that the sale of a playing field is
an absolute last resort. Local authorities must demonstrate that they
have exhausted
all other sources of funding. When possible, sale proceeds must be used
to improve outdoor sports facilities, and any new sports facilities
must be sustainable for at least 10 years. I am pleased to say that the
number of applications for disposal has shown a steady decline since
the Government introduced that policy. In 1998-99, there were 41
applications; by 2005-06 the number had fallen to 17, which
demonstrates that we have made significant inroads into the legacy of a
flawed policy That has made a real difference by ensuring that young
people have the opportunities, and the necessary access when
theyneed it. Andrew
Gwynne: May I give my hon. Friend an example of best
practice in my constituency in Labour-controlled Tameside? A major
retail development was proposed in Denton town centre that involved the
removal of a slice of the school playing field at Edgerton park arts
college. Not only did the school secure financial compensation for the
loss of the playing field, which it reinvested in a multipurpose
floodlit sports pitch for the community, but it received replacement
land attached to the playing field of exactly the same size as it lost.
It was win-win for the school and the
community.
Phil
Hope: That is an excellent example of a local authority
delivering what we require: it delivered better facilities for young
people rather than ignoring the opportunity to meet those
needs. My hon. Friend
the Member for Bury, North and others mentioned swimming. I remind the
Committee that swimming has always been a compulsory element of the PE
national curriculum, and unless completed at key stage 1 swimming and
water safety activities are statutory at key stage 2. I can tell the
hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings—I know that he
likes interesting facts—that in 2000 an Ofsted report on
swimming at key stage 2 found that 83 per cent. of pupils could swim
the 25 m standard. We think that the figure could still be improved. An
advisory group was set up and a pilot programme was carried out. As a
result of the success of that pilot, and with a positive consultation,
we intend to implement a national programme, with £5.5 million
being allocated to support what is known as a swimming charter between
April 2006 and March 2008.
Mr.
Gibb: Will the Minister confirm that 69 per cent. of
pupils are spending two hours or more on high-quality PE and games, or
did that figure relate to a special kind of school? If the latter,
could he give the overall figure of the proportion who spend two hours
on PE and
games?
Phil
Hope: The figure that I read out is correct. The 2004-05
school sports survey said that 69 per cent.—the figure is up by
7 percentage points on the previous year—of pupils in
partnership schools were spending at least two hours in a typical week
on high-quality PE and school sport. As we are drifting into territory
not covered by the clause, I am happy to write to the hon. Gentleman
with the other information that he has asked me to provide, if
wehave it.
I turn to the amendments. Clause
6 contains two new sections applying only to England that are to be
inserted into the Education Act 1996. Proposed new section 507A is a
re-enactment of the existing section 508 of the 1996 Act in its
application to children under the age of 13. Proposed new section 507B
is a new provision that replaces the LEAs’ existing functions
under section 508 of the 1996 Act with regard to young people over the
age of 13. The two new sections deal with two age groups. It is
important to note that the majority of the amendments would change new
section 507A; they would therefore amend existing provisions. Local
authorities already fulfil that duty; we are re-enacting it. The
amendments would change that.
Amendments Nos. 183, 184 and 185
would amend the wording of the provision to require that local
authorities secure “sufficient” rather than
“adequate” facilities for children’s recreation
and social and physical training. In the context of clause 6, we
believe that “adequate” provides a more challenging duty.
In order to secure “adequate” provision, local
authorities would need to have regard to the quality as well as the
quantity of its provision, but the amendments would risk communicating
to local authorities that in fulfilling the provisions of new section
507A they need consider only the scale of provision without taking into
account its quality. I do not think that that is what my hon. Friend
the Member for Bury, North intends.
5.15
pm It is also worth
noting that the new section is based on the provisions of section 508
of the 1996 Act, and that LEAs are already clear as to the meaning of
“adequate” in that context because they have been
fulfilling the duty for some time. In addition, existing section 508
will continue in respect of local authorities in Wales. Those
authorities continue to be required to ensure that there are adequate
facilities and so on. Any difference between the wording of section 508
and the new section 507A will create doubt as to the extent of the
LEAs’ functions under these provisions.
It is not necessary to require
that the duty be fulfilled “according to their needs”, as
the amendment would do. As I have explained, the new section imposes a
duty on LEAs to ensure that there are adequate facilities. LEAs are
already under a duty to secure primary and secondary education for
their areas that are appropriate to the needs of their pupils, so it
would be inappropriate to impose an additional burden on them in
respect of that aspect of their primary and secondary education
provision. My hon.
Friend the Member for Bury, North made an important point, and I want
to assure him that in fulfilling the duty, local authorities will have
to consider the needs of the child population, and of specific groups
of children. That will include the consideration that is given to
recreation and social and physical training facilities as part of the
analysis that is undertaken by local authorities and their partners in
respect of children’s trusts, as set out in the children and
young people’s plan. For the reasons that I have outlined, I
hope that my hon. Friend will feel able to withdraw the
amendment.
Amendments Nos. 149 and 64 seek
to enable authorities to form partnerships with other organisations to
secure adequate facilities for children’s recreation and social
and physical training. I appreciate the intentions behind the
amendment, and I agree that local authorities should consider
co-operating with other organisations in fulfilling the duty, but I do
not think that the amendment is necessary. Subsection (2)(a) of new
section 507A makes it clear that the local authority may
“assist the establishment,
maintenance and management
of” provision, thereby
supporting the actions of others as part of a partnership. In addition,
subsection (3) requires local authorities to consider
“co-operating with any voluntary
societies or bodies” that
provide or organise similar
activities. We have
heard many examples of the excellent work done by local voluntary
bodies and others in fulfilling those responsibilities. Local
authorities already operate in a new environment, following the
“Every Child Matters” reforms and the framework that was
established by the Children Act 2004. Those require greater partnership
working, and for local authorities to plan and commission with other
bodies within local children’s trusts arrangements. I am pleased
to say that that approach is now firmly embedded around the country,
and it is supported by a joint planning and commissioning framework for
children, young people and maternity services, set out by the
Department for Education and Skills and the Department of
Health. Within that
framework, local authorities are developing a more strategic approach
to planning and commissioning. That includes making sure that suppliers
and providers are encouraged to develop innovative approaches to
delivering services and achieving outcomes. Section 507A provides
significant flexibility to local authorities in their approach to
securing provision, and that includes their ability to enter into
partnerships with other organisations, which we know can be successful.
I hope that the hon. Member for Brent, East will not press the
amendments, because they are unnecessary, although they have provided a
helpful opportunity for us to welcome the contribution that voluntary
organisations and others make towards the provision of services for
young people.
Amendment No. 236 would include
a specific reference to field centres as one of the facilities that
authorities may establish, maintain or manage, or may assist others in
establishing, maintaining or managing as part of their local provision.
Committee members who were unaware of the benefits of field centres
heard some of them articulated here this afternoon. They offer young
people important opportunities to participate in outdoor education,
often concentrating on the natural sciences, the physical sciences and
environmental education. Depending on the centre, they might also offer
activities aimed at personal and social development, such as outdoor
pursuits. In my
previous life, I took many young people away on such trips, both as a
teacher and as a youth worker. I am sure that other hon. Members have
done the same. We all know the benefits that such activities provide,
as the examples given by my hon. Friends the Members for Wakefield
(Mary Creagh) and for
Sheffield, Hillsborough demonstrate. I am also aware that there are many
disaffected young people; that kind of learning provides opportunities
that can help to re-engage them with mainstream
education. Not all the
activities provided by field centres are likely to fall within the
concept of recreational, social and physical training as identified in
new section 507A, although in many cases they will. It would be
reasonable for a local authority to use field centres to provide
certain services as part of the fulfilment of its duty under subsection
(1). However, the list of activities and facilities referred to in
subsection (2)(a)(i) is indicative, not exclusive. We should not seek
to name in subsection (2) all the excellent facilities that authorities
may seek to provide or support. The subsection already provides local
authorities with significant flexibility on the type of facility that
could be employed in the fulfilment of the duty. For example, outdoor
education centres could be used; the list of the types of centres that
might be appropriate could go on and
on. The Department and
a range of organisations are undertaking a wide range of work to ensure
that all children and young people have a variety of high-quality
learning opportunities away from their classrooms, but as part of their
lessons. We aim to publish a manifesto for education outside the
classroom that will seek to create a joint undertaking through which
providers, voluntary organisations, youth groups, schools and local
authorities will work together to make what are often unique
experiences a reality for all children.
That manifesto is yet to be
published, although a draft of its vision and aims is on the DFES
website. The issue is subject to a lot of consultation at the moment. I
am confident that the manifesto will communicate adequately the message
that my hon. Friends seek to pass to local authorities—the
message that field centres are important. The manifesto will also help
field centres to work together more effectively to deliver improved
services to schools and increase teachers’ confidence in taking
children out of the classroom. I ask my hon. Friends to consider not
pressing the amendment. It is necessary neither in the legal sense,
nor, because of the work being done on the manifesto, as a means of
communicating the importance of field centres.
I have been speaking about
provision for children up to the age of 13; the amendments that I was
discussing related to new section 507A. I now turn to new section 507B.
As I said, it was first proposed in the Green Paper “Youth
Matters”. We think it central to ensuring that young people have
things to do and places to go to during their leisure time. I emphasise
that positive activities include any leisure time activity connected to
recreation or education that improves young people’s well-being.
They include sport and cultural activities as well as youth work, which
will be essential to the delivery of many of the positive activities in
which we want young people to engage, and to empowering young people to
access and influence the nature of the provision.
As we have been reminded, such
activities are provided by a wide variety of bodies across the public,
private and voluntary sectors. The duty under new section 507B reflects
that. However, local authorities
will be an important source of positive activities, both as providers
and, increasingly, as commissioners of services. For example, a
significant youth work contribution from the local authority will be
central to the fulfilment of the new duty to secure young people access
to sufficient positive leisure time activities. In fulfilling the new
duty, local authorities will need to consider whether their current
youth work contribution is appropriate, following consultation with
local young people. I
turn to amendment No. 150, which concerns disabled young people. We are
sympathetic to its intentions; it is vital that young people with
disabilities should be able to access the positive leisure time
activities that the clause seeks to ensure for all young people. It is
also true that young people with disabilities often face additional
barriers, and the clause has been written with such young people in
mind. Young people
with disabilities are already included in the duty on securing access
to sufficient positive leisure time activities. The authority will have
to take into account its responsibilities under the Disability
Discrimination Act 2005 to promote equality of opportunity for disabled
people. However, it is important to recognise that many other groups of
young people could be mentioned in the Bill. They also face barriers to
participation; they could be physical, cultural, social or—as
the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke)
mentioned—economic. We believe that local authorities should
determine the relative needs of each group in their area, and also the
actions they should take following local assessment and within the
planning and commissioning process led by the Children’s Trust.
Section 17 of the Children Act 2004 requires local authorities to work
with other partners to produce a children and young people’s
plan, and the need of disabled young people to access positive leisure
time activities should be included in that
plan. I emphasise that
proposed new section 507B(8)(a) requires the local authority to consult
young people and to take their views into account. That consultation
will inform the local authority’s planning. Statutory guidance
issued under that new section will make clear the expectation that the
local authority should consult and consider the needs of disabled young
people. That is vital, and it will be stated in statutory
guidance. Finally on
this point, subsection (9) of the proposed new section requires local
authorities to “publicise
information about positive leisure-time activities, and
facilities” to young
people. The provision of information on those activities is vital for
young people with disabilities, who have additional information
requirements. The National Youth Agency has advised the Department on
how the requirement can best be fulfilled, and we will set out in
guidance that the information requirements of disabled young people
should be clearly
addressed. I hope that
I have reassured Members that not only does the new duty include
disabled young people, but that the accompanying statutory guidance
will specifically address the needs of disabled young people. On that
ground, I request that the amendment will not be pressed to a
Division.
Amendment No. 23 raises important
questions about funding, and how we expect local authorities to
resource any actions they take in fulfilling the new duty. The clause
places a duty to secure access to sufficient positive activities and
facilities. Some of that provision will be supplied by the authority
itself, but, as we have heard, much will be provided by
others—for example, extended schools, voluntary sector bodies,
or private providers.
Those organisations are not in
receipt of the revenue support grant. Therefore, it is not meaningful
for the legislation to require their provision to be funded by it.
However, even setting aside that legal point and considering only the
services provided by the local authority itself, the amendment still
fails to offer sufficient flexibility to local authorities with regard
to the various funding streams available to them. For example, it would
preclude local authorities from making use of local area agreements
funding, despite the fact that that contains some £50 million
over the next two years that was previously ring-fenced for the
“positive activities for young people” programme. It
would also prevent local authorities from making use of funding streams
that are explicitly designed to help them deliver this duty. I have
mentioned the £115 million youth opportunity fund and the youth
capital fund. Amendment No. 23 would negate the new power in the clause
that allows local authorities to charge, as it would prevent local
authorities from using money raised by such charges to offset the costs
of provision. The
revenue support grant represents only 6 per cent. of the total external
funding received by local authorities from central Government. If we
were to restrict the scope of funding in this way, the amendment would
require local authorities to severely cut back the provision of leisure
time activities and facilities—which, I stress, are often shared
by the wider
community. Finally, I
remind Opposition Members that the funding restrictions proposed by
their amendment would be fundamentally at odds with the increasing
discretion accorded to local authorities to judge the best use of their
finances, and to be judged according to the outcomes they achieve.
Practically speaking, it is also impossible for authorities to identify
how much revenue support grant they receive, as that forms an
unspecified part of the larger formula grant. Authorities will not
therefore know how much they could spend in the fulfilment of this
duty. For all those reasons, the amendment is unhelpful, and I invite
hon. Members not to press
it. I think I have
covered most of the matters Members have raised, including a variety of
points about sport, swimming and education outside the classroom, and
issues to do with the youth opportunity card. This is an important
clause that makes a significant contribution to the Bill and to the
provision of services and facilities for young people. I hope that the
clause will be supported as an act of cross-party consensus so that we
can provide better facilities for young
people.
| 
