I shall look at that, but it is a fact that in these cases it is often very difficult or impossible to replace the retiring school teacher.

I was giving the general background in Cornwall and elsewhere and the considerations which led Cornwall, along with other authorities, to suggest a number of closures in recent years. Against that are set arguments of the kind which the hon. Gentleman gave, which I need not repeat as he put them very clearly to the House.

Under the previous Government, the then Joint Under-Secretary of State—the hon. Gentleman is aware that the decision to which he is objecting was made by his hon. Friend at that time—gave these questions what seems to me to have been the kind of balanced consideration which was needed as between the reasons for closing schools and the reasons for keeping them open. After all, I have no bias in favour of defending the previous Government's decisions—rather the reverse in many instances—but, having studied the files very carefully, I feel that they applied their mind properly to the balance of argument in these cases.

Perhaps I can illustrate the point by dealing with what happened in Cornwall in the last 12 months. In all, there have been seven cases which have come to us from Cornwall, including the specific ones to which I shall refer in a moment. In four cases, the Joint Under-Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Lewisham, North (Mr. Chataway), who was responsible for most of these decisions at the time, agreed with the county council, in two he rejected its proposals, and in the seventh the decision was not made and will fall to be made in due course.

In the case of the Cury Church of England school the Cornwall authority's proposals were rejected. In the case of the Bara Head county primary school they were approved. In the case of the Withiel county primary school they were approved. In the case of the Trevethan infants school at Falmouth they were approved. In the case of the Lewannick county primary school the county's proposals were rejected by a decision at national level. In the case of the Chyvelah county primary school the decision still has to be made.

As regards the Tresmeer school, the Cornwall County Council was advancing two main reasons for its decision. First, there was the condition of the premises. The hon. Gentleman probably knows that these were very bad. I have a report which says that the inside walls were damp, the ceiling timbers were rotten, the slate roof of the school was in a dangerous state, there was no electricity in the school and heating by paraffin stoves was unsatisfactory. The two classrooms were sub-standard in size, 396 and 270 sq. ft. respectively. The authority estimated that it would have to spend at least £1,500 on the building straight away if it were to continue in use, and even then it would still be unsatisfactory. That was the authority's main reason for putting forward the closure proposal.

Its second reason was that closure would release two teachers for service elsewhere and, in the prevailing teacher shortage, this was an important consideration. A further point in addition to those two main points was that the authority would save financially in salaries and other costs £1,870 a year over and above the expense on the building to which I have referred.

Against that, the Department received some very weighty objections from 14 local government electors in the village, from the National Union of Agricultural Workers in the area and from the Launceston Rural District Council. I need not go over that ground again since it has been mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

It is clear that the decision in this case was very difficult. There were considerable arguments on both sides. My predecessor was influenced above all by the state of the buildings and by the fact that closure would lead to the saving of two teachers. The two school buildings at Warbstow and Egloskerry to which it was proposed to transfer the children were in a better condition, and if one of the three had to close, it was sensible that in the situation it should be the one at Tresmeer.

In the event, the decision of my predecessor was made in March of this year. There has been a lot of unrest since then and, as the hon. Member said, there was a strike of parents at the beginning of this term until the third week in October. But I understand that all the children are now attending school, 25 having gone to Egloskerry, 12 to Warbstow, 4 to Tregadillet and 6 are in schools in Launceston.

The hon. Gentleman raised the question of transport for the children. I have a report which suggests that things are not quite as bad as he suggested. He suggested that some were leaving home at 8.5 in the morning and not getting back until ten minutes to five. I am told that the Majority leave at 8.40 and return at 3.40 or 350. The school day at Warbstow has been put forward a quarter of an hour, 9.15 instead of nine o'clock, to meet the problem. Most children are away from home at 8.55 to go to Warbstow and return between four o'clock and 4.15. A few using public service vehicles by arrangement start out at 8.35 and do not arrive home until 4.25, which is a long day for small children. I hope that the authority will look at the problems. I hope that what has been said by the hon. Gentleman will be brought to its attention. I will remind it of them and hope that it can make improvements.

I will look into the request for a public inquiry and write to the hon. Gentleman about it. I cannot, I am afraid, deal with that in detail at the moment.

I can only say in conclusion that I am advised that in so many of these cases when there is bitterness and resentment at the beginning of new arrangements, fairly quickly the children settle down in their new schools and the parents accept and even welcome the new arrangements and become attached to the new schools. It happens over and over again, and I hope it will happen in the Tresmeer case and that the bitterness to which the hon. Gentleman referred will soon disappear.

I will consider everything that the hon. Gentleman has said and any other points that he likes to write to me about, and I shall be prepared to write to the authority about them. But he has recognised that as the decision has been made it would be wrong, even if it were possible, to reverse it, and wrong in the interests of the children, which is what really matters in all cases of this kind.