................................................................................ 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...