................................................................................
ON THE RECORD
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 31.3.96
................................................................................
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Don Foster, you said the Liberal
Democrats say you ought to be able to control your own affairs, but on some
important school policies you say we will deprive you of that control.
DON FOSTER: Well I am not sure what control you are
talking about. I mean, one of the things we've been absolutely clear about is
that individual schools should be given the maximum opportunity to determine
their own affairs. That's why Liberal Democrats in Cambridgeshire started the
whole move towards the devolution of power and responsibility to individual
schools. We then secondly say that there are a number of decisions that
individual schools simply cannot take for themselves; fair allocation of
resources, pupil admission procedures, issues that are, if you like, strategic
planning issues. Those we believe should be taken as far as possible at the
local level at a democratically accountable level through the local education
authorities. And, then, finally, we said there are a number of decisions that
cannot be made even at that level and they should be made centrally. And,
those are issues, for instance, the broad direction of the National Curriculum,
about inspection arrangements and quality monitoring. So, what we do is we
start at the bottom and say: let's have the lowest possible decision making
level for decisions. And, then, if they can't be made at that level, well you
look at the next possible level up. It's a devolution system.
HUMPHRYS: Right, so that if they want, for
instance, if parents want for their children because they think it's in their
best interests, grant-maintained schools, you're saying to them: Don't care,
you can't have it.
FOSTER: Yes we are saying that because one of
the things you have to bear in mind is any decisions that are made at one
particular school do have an impact upon other schools in the area. One of the
things we know, for instance, about grant-maintained schools is that in the
early days they were getting additional sums of money to help them and to
encourage them to become grant-maintained and that money was being taken away
from all of the other schools in the local area, depriving them of desperately
needed resources.
HUMPHRYS: So creating an inequality in other
words?
FOSTER: Very much an inequality. Now, some of
those financial inequalities have now gone because the Government was found
guilty of doing it and has had to put a stop to it and that's part of the
reason why grant-maintained schools are really not increasing in number very
much. It's probably been the least successful policy of this government, which
is therefore a bit surprising it could still hammer on about it. But the other
thing that then happened was you get into a situation where it was very
difficult in a particular local area to make any sensible strategic planning
decisions because you got one school, perhaps a grant-maintained school going
its own way not in any sort of partnership and co-operation with other schools
in the area.
HUMPHRYS: So you don't like that because it
creates inequalities, as you say. There is something else that you believe
creates inequalities and that is Selective Education. But, here's the
inconsistency. You say to people you can have that if you want it.
FOSTER: No, no again, we're-There's no
inconsistency at all.
HUMPHRYS: Well.
FOSTER: What we say as a party national is very
simple. We believe that selection, based on ability, based on parental
interview is wrong. We oppose it. We nevertheless say very simply that in
each local education authority level the decision about the best form of
arrangement should be made at that local level. That's the best area for
making decisions about school arrangements. Now, we hope that-
HUMPHRYS: Right, so you'll let them decide that
but you won't let them decide the other.
FOSTER: No, no. It's not a case of letting
them. What we're saying is that they are democratically elected people. One
of the problems we've got in this country at the moment is - particularly,
under the Conservatives - that over the last seventeen years, is that they've
taken so many powers away from local people, centralised them so that Central
Government is determining so much - often passing those powers onto unelected
remote quangos of one sort or another. We want to actually give local people
power to determine arrangements for themselves. So, there's nothing
inconsistent with saying that Liberal Democrats oppose selection but we don't
object to the fact that local decision making is crucially important, that we
would campaign in local areas against selection, the introduction of additional
grammar schools for example.
HUMPHRYS: But-But, people, I think, are going to
be trully puzzled about this.
FOSTER: Why?
HUMPHRYS: Well, you oppose grant-maintained
schools and you say you may not have-not democracy should prevail here and if
you discuss it at your local level and decide you want it, you can have it.
You don't say that about grant-maintained schools but you do say that about
selection. Now, where is the consistency there?
FOSTER: John, but the consistency's absolutely
clear. What you fail to understand John - and, I don't understand why it is so
difficult -is that we believe that in-for certain decisions they should be made
at the local level and so therefore we leave people to make those decisions...
HUMPHRYS: On selection - yes.
FOSTER: That doesn't stop us having a view as to
the sort of decision we hope they'll make. Let's imagine that in one
particular area of the country the Conservatives take overall control of that
local council. Although, I would campaign against that council making a
decision to introduce additional forms of selection in that area, I would still
defend their right to have that decision-making power. That's what democracy's
all about. I may not like the decision. It may be against my philosophical
views and my political views, but I still defend their right to make that
decision.
HUMPHRYS: But you don't even argue consistently at
a local level. You may argue for selection, you may argue against selection at
a local level. There is no consistency in the Party at all.
FOSTER: No, there's no lack of consistency at
all. I don't know anyone of my colleagues in Local Government who is in favour
of selection.
HUMPHRYS: We've just heard somebody from
Kingston.
FOSTER: No you didn't hear somebody at Kingston
at all. What you heard was a situation in Kingston, for example, where there
are two selective schools and ten non-selective schools in the area. That's the
current arrangement and the decision whether or not to add anything to it, I
don't know a single Liberal Democrat in Kingston in favour of making more
grammer schools available increasing the level of selection. The question is
whether or not they will make a decision to abolish the existing selection of
those two particular schools.
HUMPHRYS: But, they-they-they-None of them will
argue against selection in Kingston and indeed one of them, says "I'm going to
let my child go to a select school".
FOSTER: No, John, your film didn't show any
evidence whatsoever of Liberal Democrats in Kingston being in favour of
selection. That's simply not true.
HUMPHRYS: They were not-
FOSTER: But what you saw on the film was a
particular Councillor who sends her child to one of the selective schools and
she did that because like all parents - and all parents will do this - is they
look around for what is the best available choice for their individual child,
so that that child can succeed. And that's what Liberal Democrats want to do
for the Education system right across the country-
HUMPHRYS: Well-
FOSTER: -to ensure that there is high quality
education for all pupils which is why we're committed - unlike other Parties -
to investing more in Education and Training to make sure we can raise the
quality of Education for every single school; so that we can have choices - not
between schools, in sort of a free market approach but we can actually have
diversity within each individual school.
HUMPHRYS: You heard Julie Haines in that film and
this goes even beyond the kind of cynicism that I hinted at a moment ago,
saying not only will she not support-does she support selection for her own
child, but-but she will not follow up your national policy and argue against
selection because that would cost votes in Kingston. That is opportunism of
the worst sort, isn't it?
FOSTER: It's not about opportunism. John, I
don't understand the difficulty you seem to have. It does seem to me that what
you are trying to have difficulty coming to terms with is a situation in which
we believe in local decision making...
HUMPHRYS: No. You want to have your cake and eat
it.
FOSTER: No, you say-you're now picking up Ted
Wragg's quotes about saying you can't have your cake and eat it. The reality is
that local decision making about certain issues is for us absolutely
fundamental and we believe that those local people should determine what they
believe to be in the best interests of their local communities. I don't believe
that those sorts of decisions are ones that should be make by Central
Government politicians.
HUMPHRYS: Well, in that case, why is it not being
argued at local level because it's not being argued at local level - is it? -
because you know it will cost you votes?
FOSTER: But, in the vast majority of cases, the
vast majority of Liberal Democrat Councillors are arguing against increased
selection but in some cases they have to take into account what are the wishes
of the local community that they represent.
HUMPHRYS: Right. So, in those other cases - you
say the vast majority - that means there are plenty of cases still where they
are behaving in a pretty cynical way.
FOSTER: No. Well, I don't know of very many
examples. I mean you've had to spend about a week, as I understand it,
traipsing round the country with your camera crews-
HUMPHRYS: Well.
FOSTER: -to find a single example.
HUMPHRYS: Well, look around.
FOSTER: And, you haven't found many other
examples that I know of.
.
HUMPHRYS: Well, look around. We're going to have
- aren't we? - under your system an extraordinary patchwork of different
systems, from one Local Education Authority to another, doesn't that bother
you?
FOSTER: Not particularly but what I want to see
more than anything is a situation where we have a number of things in place, in
our education system. The first thing I want to see, that we have right across
the country - although it be delivered in a variety of different ways - is high
quality early years education for all three and four year olds.
HUMPHRYS: Yeah. I'm talking about selection now,
as you know.
FOSTER: No but the point is that it is relevant
because what we don't say is there is one particular way of delivering that
high quality early years education. So, we will want to see a patchwork, as
you put it, of provision through the voluntary sector, the private sector, the
state school sector. What we will do is insist on the standards of quality
that must be in place and we'll make that provision and we'll invest the money
to do it. And, then, in terms of primary and secondary education, yes, we have
no objection to individual schools developing their own style and ethos. But,
the critical thing to remember is that for the vast majority of children their
parents have no choice about which school to send them and that's why it's
important that whatever that patchwork is like we make sure that every
individual school provides high quality education that can cater for the needs
of each individual child.
HUMPHRYS: Alright. Patchwork.
FOSTER: And if that's a patchwork, so what?
HUMPHRYS: Well, absolutely is a patchwork. And,
of course, it's a patchwork that's going to change its shape all the time as
well because we'll have a Local Education Authority this week saying: we like
selective education, we'll have it in our area. Changes, balance of power on
the coucil, changes in the next election - you know how often councils have
elections, whether it's a third of the members or whatever it happens to be -
changes again next time. Where are they? They don't know what's happening to
them.
FOSTER: But if that's the wish of local people,
then may be that's what will happen. The reality is- But, the reality is that
the vast majority of local people won't want to see those constant changes.
That's the issue in Kingston. They may not - all of the councillors - be
particularly happy about selection but the question is do you want to change it
or have you got a system that in Kingston is working reasonably well? And,
what they're doing is concentrating their attention - as I know they are in
Kingston - is in providing more additional support in such a way they don't
have the very large classes that they've got in Kingston, which they've decided
is their number one priority. So you're not going to get constant changes,
what teachers want in our schools at the moment is the opportunity to have more
resources in their schools, more books and equipment and decent buildings in
which to work and those are going to be the key priorities in ensuring real
opportunities to develop the potential of every single child.
HUMPHRYS: So-So,We might end up with a pretty
chaotic system but you justify that on grounds of local democracy. Is that
what you're saying.
FOSTER: You describe it as chaotic, I certainly
don't. I see nothing wrong.
HUMPHRYS: You're talking about a patchwork all
over the place.
FOSTER: No. I don't see anything wrong with
there being diversity of provision in terms of the type of schools that we have
as long as within those schools you have that high quality provision that
caters for the need of every single child and only the Liberal Democrats are
willing to make the commitment to put the resources in to achieve that.
HUMPHRYS: Don Foster, thank you very much.
...oooOooo...
|