·
Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con)
I want to speak today about
just one issue of great concern, which is how negatively the proposed new
national funding formula for schools will impact on schools in my Congleton
constituency if it is not revised. It is critical for the children of my
constituency that it is.
Prior
to the announcement last week, my constituency schools were already among the
poorest-funded in the country. We therefore expected a good funding increase.
After this announcement, however, headteachers tell me that theirs will be the
very worst-funded schools in the country. The most poorly-funded local
authority used to be £4,158 per head, but this will now be Cheshire East, at
£4,122 per head. Imagine my heads’ consternation last week when they discovered
that their funding will not increase, but actually drop. I use the word
consternation; they used the word outrage. No wonder that within 48 hours of the
announcement no fewer than five headteachers came to my constituency office to
express their utter dismay.
A
year ago, I took a group of headteachers to meet the former Education Minister,
my hon. Friend the Member for East Surrey (Mr Gyimah), to ensure that he heard
directly their concerns on the poor funding for Cheshire East schools, and to
implore him that the new formula must address them. And this was after a
similar meeting in the previous Parliament, when Cheshire East local authority
officers met his predecessor for the same purpose. In addition, hundreds of my
constituents signed a petition for fairer funding. This issue is far from new,
which is why last week’s announcement was so shocking.
My
headteachers are asking how Cheshire East has become the most poorly-funded
area, after they made such a convincing case to the Minister at their meeting.
They thought they had been heard. I, too, find it difficult to understand.
What
is particularly concerning is that these are some of highest-performing schools
in the country, but there is a point at which their laudable level of
achievement cannot be maintained. Only yesterday, the Secretary of State said
in this place that she had been able to ensure that underfunded areas would be
able to “gain up to 3%” over 2018-19 and 2019-20. My schools are facing exactly
the opposite—not a rise of 3%, as the majority of my high schools face a
reduction of 2.9%.
Before
I relay some of the unpalatable options facing headteachers in my constituency,
let me set in context last week’s announcement, because a number of other
factors make the funding reductions for my schools far worse. First, the
National Audit Office has said that schools face a reduction of 8% in funding
in real terms by 2020, due chiefly to unfunded increases in employer costs.
That makes the average savings to be found not over 2%, but over 10%. In
addition, the reduction in the educational services grant will mean a further
hit for academies in my constituency, which means all seven high schools. Even
graver, there is still no local plan in Cheshire East, which has led to
hundreds of new houses being built without additional funding for the
proportionate increase in the number of children attending schools. This effect
of so-called “lagging” means that schools are required to educate additional
children with no additional funding.
What
do headteachers tell me will be the effect of this new formula on their
schools? With reference to the primary schools, Martin Casserley, headteacher
at Black Firs Primary School, says they will be forced into significant
reductions, including reducing support staff to help special educational needs
children.
The
high schools will lose £800,000 a year between them. Eaton Bank alone will face
losses of £300,000 over three years. Headteacher Ed O’Neill says this would be
“deeply damaging” and
“the
removal of the educational services grant…and the NAO-calculated pressures mean
that total savings of 12% will have to be found.”
Richard
Middlebrook, head of Alsager High, who was nominated for headteacher of the
year and is a national leader of education, says that the only way to survive
would be to open for only four days a week, narrow the curriculum or close the
sixth form—all completely implausible.
Dennis
Oliver, headteacher of Holmes Chapel High, also a national leader of education,
is looking at the removal of all teaching assistant posts, or the loss of all
technicians, or the loss of eight non-viable sixth-form groups, or removing
heating and lighting for a year or removing general resources for children,
such as paper and books. John Leigh, head at Sandbach High and a
long-established Ofsted inspector, tells me he risks losing his school’s
“outstanding” status. He now has a £200,000 deficit as a result of lagged
funding, due to new housing in Sandbach. He believes that the only feasible way
to run the school would be to remove the rich programme of extracurricular
activities, reduce the curriculum offer and/or reduce the number of
sixth-form classes. He is already teaching 12 hours of maths a week himself to
help balance the budget.
Sarah
Burns, headteacher at Sandbach Boys School, has calculated that losing the
entire music, art, business studies or geography departments could achieve the
reductions, but that is simply not possible for a school that is a regional
leader in music and the creative arts. She is concerned about the recruitment
and retention of key staff while managing a reduction of 2.9% and she
calculates it will actually be 5%, taking other factors into account.
David
Hermitt, chief executive officer of Congleton Multi-Academy Trust, of which I
am a patron, is facing a reduction of 2.4% at Congleton High, but he tells me
that in addition he has been educating over 50 children every year for free for
the last three years due to the increased housing nearby, equating to over
£200,000 per year of missing funding in each of the last three years. This has
depleted healthy reserves. He says the school has made every cut it can to
ensure that it has a balanced budget. He says that,
“we
have increased average class sizes, removed some subjects from our post 16
provision, increased contact time for teachers and reduced the amount spent on
books and computer equipment.”
I am
proud to be patron for this well-run multi-academy trust, which is already
helping to drive down back-office costs for the three schools in the trust by
providing central services of finance and human resources.
Middlewich
High faces even deeper reductions as a result of the change in funding for
children with special educational needs and disabilities, for which it has a
dedicated unit. It is a lead school for emotional health, and Members may
recall that during Prime Minister’s questions recently, I drew attention to its
outstanding work with the most vulnerable students and families. However, Keith
Simpson, its headteacher, has said,
“as
Head I have no option but to reduce staffing from this area in order to meet a
minimum number of teachers to provide a curriculum.”
He
added:
“This
is alongside the shortfall in SEND funding for schools that maintain a truly
inclusive intake. This short-term view will only store up problems for society
and other services in the long term. I feel that the holistic support for
children and families is being sacrificed and has no educational value in
raising standards for our most vulnerable students.”
Those
headteachers, whom I know well, are utterly dedicated and professional, but the
concerns that I have expressed on their behalf today have been increasing for
several years. They have concluded that the proposed national fairer funding
formula is not fit for purpose, certainly in Cheshire East. They are asking the
Government to go back to the drawing board after listening to the outcome of
the current consultation, and I am asking for the concerns that I have
expressed today to be included in that consultation. I hope that the Deputy
Leader of the House will refer them to the Schools Minister, and will convey my
request for an early meeting with him to which those headteachers will travel
at short notice; and I hope that the Schools Minister will not just hear but
act, by reviewing the impact of the new funding formula on the schools in my
constituency. Without such a review, there will be grave implications for the
education and life chances of the children about whom those headteachers care
so deeply.
I wish
you, Mr Speaker, and all Members in the Chamber a happy and restful Christmas.
