Nick Gibb (Shadow Minister (Schools), Education; Bognor Regis & Littlehampton, Conservative)

I want to say a few words about the issue of federated schools. The purpose of the clause appears to be to enable the provisions on federated  schools in the Education Act 2002 to apply to theBill’s provisions on the establishment of new schools. Clause 11(2) states that the phrase

“ ‘federated school’ has the meaning given by section 24(2)”

of the 2002 Act. I looked up that section, which states:

“In this Chapter ‘federation’ means a group of schools that are federated by virtue of this section, and "federated school" means a school forming part of a federation.”

So that is clear, then.

Section 24 deals with two or more schools being able to form a federation, with a single governing body, which in prescribed cases can be treated as a single school. That type of federation is, I presume, of the type referred to as a hard federation, whereas in a soft federation the head of a successful school would take on the additional headship of a local school that was failing or coasting, but would not formally merge the two governing bodies.

Will the Minister confirm that, notwithstanding the creation of a federation of schools of the hard kind, the exam results of the individual schools within the federation would continue to be published separately? Will she also confirm that parents applying for their children to attend a school in the federation would be able to specify the one that they wanted their children to attend, and would not be forced to apply just to the federation?

Does the Minister envisage any maximum size for a federation? I recently met an LEA officer who presented me with an apocalyptic vision of what a future federation could look like. She said that there could be a federation of 20 schools; that parents could have to apply to the federation rather than to an individual school; that the federation could allocate children to one of its schools as it saw fit; and that the exam results of the schools could be consolidated into a block for the federation as a whole.

That would in effect create a mini-education authority, within which parents would have no choice of school and exam results would no longer be published. That would take us back to the regime of the 1970s and early 1980s. I hope that the Minister will confirm that such a use of the federated schools provisions in clause 11 and in section 24 of the 2002 Act will not be permitted.

Annette Brooke (Children & the Family, Cross-Portfolio and Non-Portfolio Responsibilities; Mid Dorset & North Poole, Liberal Democrat)

I would like to make somebrief comments because the Liberal Democrats support the general principle of federation. It fitswith our alternative vision—alternative to that of the Government and the Conservatives, that is—of a collaborative model. I have some questions about exactly what is envisaged under the clause. Like the hon. Gentleman I find that that is not entirely clear when one refers to the 2002 Act, and we join in the request for clarity.

I am interested also in the fact that federation could be horizontal, vertical or a mixture, and would like the Minister to comment on that. I can see that in some areas a vertical federation would provide advantages such as continuity and economies of scale in purchasing, among other things; interesting ideas also emerge from what would effectively be the twinning of schools, when a school with a particular strength could  support another that might be weaker in that area, and vice versa. We support the principles, but would like more detail.

Anne Snelgrove (PPS (Lord Warner, Minister of State), Department of Health; South Swindon, Labour)

I want to raise briefly some points that have arisen from correspondence that I have had with Wiltshire education authority on federated schools. I support the concept; it offers opportunities to solve the problems that will occur when school rolls fall and we have to consider closures. In particular, Wiltshire has had difficulties with small rural schools, which it has raised with me. A number of the children in my constituency go across the border to Wiltshire schools, and I want to raise the matter on their behalf.

Federations enable small rural schools to remain open, and Wiltshire has enthusiastically pursued the concept in order to keep rural communities going. However, it believes that this clause and clause 7 might prevent it from continuing to do so. I should appreciate an opportunity to discuss the matter further with the Minister in private in order to ensure that Wiltshire is afforded every opportunity to carry on federating as it is doing. The Bill should not prevent authorities from finding creative solutions to federating schools so that they may remain open. I am sure that all hon. Members would regret it if that were to happen.

The difficulty is that when schools federate as some have done, the Department for Education and Skills says that they have to announce a school’s closure. That is putting some schools and governing bodies off federating, and might lead—in some cases, has led—to the closure of small rural schools, which have been unable to remain open without federation. I shall be very interested in the Minister’s comments. My summary might not be exactly correct, but I think that I have the gist: Wiltshire and other rural LEAs should be able to federate in order to keep their schools open.

Jacqui Smith (Minister of State (Schools and 14-19 Learners), Department for Education and Skills; Redditch, Labour)

The clause re-enacts the provisions of section 68 of the Education Act 2005 in respect of England. It provides for specific circumstances in which a new maintained school may be planned to be a member of a federation from the outset, and become one as soon as it opens. The hon. Member for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton is right in his assumption that that relates to what we tend to call a hard federation, as opposed to a softer or more informal one. He mentioned accountability. Even in a hard federation, schools retain their individual identities. They will publish separate results, although they may also decide to publish joint results as well. However, the accountability for results remains clear for each school, and there will be separate admissions processes for the individual schools, so the choice that the hon. Gentleman identified will remain with each school within the federation.

The vision that the hon. Gentleman outlined is apocalyptic, but I do not imagine it to be a serious concern. On the whole, the direction of travel in respect of collaboration and federation is beneficial for the development of standards and local collaboration. We will remove by regulation the current maximum of five for a federation of schools, but I do not foresee the  development of unwieldy federations. One of the intentions behind the trust model is that it will provide us with a different way of developing collaboration and joint working between schools. However, to reassure the hon. Gentleman, I can tell him that accountability and admissions proposals in respect of federations remain as he asked me to assure him they would.

John Hayes (Shadow Minister (Vocational Education), Education; South Holland & The Deepings, Conservative)

I take the right hon. Lady’s point about rural schools. There are similar circumstances in my constituency. However, what is the purpose of increasing the number beyond five? In practice, surely one reaches a point at which federation cannot be achieved without compromising the relationship with the local community, the identity of the schools, the historical relationships with parents and so on. Why increase the number? Does the Minister want to set a new limit?

Jacqui Smith (Minister of State (Schools and 14-19 Learners), Department for Education and Skills; Redditch, Labour)

Those are precisely the sorts of issues that the governing body will consider when determining whether it wants to enter into a federation. Let us be quite clear that, in almost every circumstance, decisions about entering into federations are made by governing bodies and, of course, they are interested in the extent to which that would help them to deliver the objectives they had set out for the schools. I tend to think that that would be the logical way to determine the appropriate size of a federation, rather than a centrally imposed limit. There is one circumstance in which a federation would be proposed outside of a decision made by a governing body. It relates to some of the proposals for those schools that are causing concern, which we will come to in part 4 of the Bill. We are suggesting that a local authority could propose a federation as a response to failure in particular schools.

The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole asked whether vertical and horizontal federations would come under the clause. The answer is yes, and I agree with the her that there might well be circumstances in which there would be a federation of some primary schools and a secondary school. As well as that structure, horizontal federations of schools in the same phase would be appropriate. Once again, which of those was appropriate would depend on the particular circumstances.

The clause relates to specific provisions for the setting up of a new school. Effectively, it ensures that a governing body is not prevented from setting up a new school as part of a federation. Of course, there is a range of other collaborative arrangements—ranging from soft federations to hard federations—that is outside the remit of the clause, but as I suggested earlier, many of them are desirable and we would want them to be developed.

On the issues raised by my hon. Friend the Member for South Swindon (Anne Snelgrove), I am happy to take up the specific points that she outlined with respect to Wiltshire. I would be concerned if small local schools were prevented from federating. As my hon. Friend will know, in the toolkit that we produced to deal with falling rolls we proposed that federation may be an effective measure. So, although I do not  have the answer today, I will consider the specific case that my hon. Friend outlined and come back to her with a response.

The clause ensures that existing regulations allow those proposing a new school, or the temporary governing body of a school before it opens, to complete the processes normally carried out by the governing body of a school that wishes to become a member of a federation. That involves consulting parents and others about the proposals before taking a final decision. It is a sensible and time-saving provision and may be particularly important to the fresh start of a school in need of additional support.