I am delighted to have this opportunity of raising an issue which has aroused considerable feeling in my constituency and which has implications for villages in rural areas elsewhere, namely, the proposed closure of Elsted village school.

There has been a school in Elsted since 1820. For over 160 years Elsted primary school has provided generations of pupils with a solid foundation in basic numeracy and literacy as well as a happy environment in which to learn and develop. It was, therefore, a thunderbolt for this village and for the surrounding community to learn that their school was threatened with closure, not for academic reasons, nor because of inordinate cost, but so that it could be merged with a smaller school in the nearby village of Harting. On 24 February the West Sussex county council passed a resolution to close not only Elsted school but the Cocking primary school—another village school in my constituency, with only 17 pupils.

Under the Education Act 1980, proposals for school closures must be submitted to the Secretary of State. I was anxious to take the first opportunity to acquaint my right hon. and hon. Friends with my strong objections to the closure of Elsted school and my conviction that there are special considerations that justify a rejection of the local education authority's proposal.

I wish to tell my hon. Friend the Minister a little about Elsted school, and also a little about the village—which is far from the madding crowd and set in a most delightful part of my rural constituency. I had the pleasure of visiting Elsted school only last weekend with governors and parents. The school presently has 27 children on the roll, although the number will rise to 32 at the beginning of the next academic year and will continue to rise over the next few years.

The school has always provided a high standard of education and has attracted pupils from surrounding villages such as Treyford, Didling, Trotton, Minstead, Steadham and Hurst as well as South and East Harting. There has always been strong parental involvement in the school. Equipment purchased by the parent-teacher association is too numerous to mention in full but includes the BBC computer, part of which was financed by funds raised by the pupils in a cross-country run. The equipment includes a coloured television, a tape recorder and various sports equipment. A major item that has been provided by parents is a swimming pool, which is also used after school hours and during holidays.

The school is situated in the centre of Elsted village. It has an excellent headmistress in Mrs. Anne Day. The school is a focal point of local community activities and a significant patron of the village hall. The parents reflect a cross-section of the community, including agricultural workers, one-parent families and professional groups, all of whom appreciate that a small mixed ability class can create a good social, emotional and educational atmosphere for children.

The headmaster of Midhurst intermediate school, which many of the pupils subsequently attend, is quoted as saying: In our experience over a number of years, we would rate Elsted School as a first class example of what a village primary school should be … Well taught groundwork has enabled Elsted pupils to take the transition to this school in their stride. We feel that it would be a great pity to close a school that we recognise as a fine example of its kind. The same sentiments are shared by county councillor Dr. Derek Stephenson, who made an impassioned and compelling speech when the subject was debated at the West Sussex county council meeting. That view is shared also by the action committee to save Elsted school, representatives of which came to the House today to present me with a petition. It is shared also by the school governors, by the Sussex rural community council and by the parish council of Elsted with Treyford and Didling. How could the closure of such a school be contemplated?

Apparently, advice was received that a combined school at nearby Harting would achieve economies of scale. I think we have heard that before. Coming from one of the low-spending authorities which has consistently followed Government strictures on local government expenditure, I am the first to appreciate that all potential areas of saving money must be explored. However, the closure of Elsted school will make neither financial nor educational sense.

New facts have come to light to support this view and I ask my hon. Friend to take full account of them. First, on the financial front, a merger will prove more, rather than less, costly per pupil. The council's estimate of the running costs of Elsted school is some £35,688 a year, but this is based on amortising building maintenance over a relatively short period. In fact, it has been estimated that if the cost is spread over 10 years and the increase in intake in September is taken into account the running cost per pupil will work out at £1,062 per annum. This is less than the average running cost of small rural schools in West Sussex, which is currently about £1,200 per pupil. It may also be significantly less than the cost per pupil at the new merged Harting school, because, in a survey conducted by the action committee against the closure of Elsted school, all but one of the parents with children currently at Elsted school indicated their intention of sending their children to schools other than Harting if Elsted is closed.

While my hon. Friend may feel that a survey collected by such a group is somewhat biased, even allowing for a measure of error, I still feel that it is a very significant factor, which has not been taken into account, that, with freedom of parental choice, not all the pupils of Elsted school will necessarily be sent freely by their parents to the new merged school in Harting. This must necessarily affect very substantially and directly the average cost of education per pupil at such a new school. While that may not undermine the feasibility or continued viability of any school based at Harting, I believe that this comparative exercise justifies the continued existence of Elsted school.

Furthermore, no capital receipts will accrue to the education authority or, as far as I am aware, to the Church through the disposal of the present Elsted school building. This is because the school was originally provided in trust for the education of local villagers, and the property will revert to the trust and not the local education authority. There is no crock of gold, therefore, for the local authority through the disposal of the capital asset.

I would add and urge my hon. Friend to consider as well that my understanding is that in the course of the last year not insignificant sums of money have been spent by the local education authority on refurbishing Elsted school and improving the oil heating facilities there, presumably at great cost to local ratepayers and taxpayers. It does seem rather extraordinary that within such a short space of time, a matter of months after spending such capital moneys, the local education authority and the county council should recommend to the Secretary of State that that money be effectively written off, the school closed and the children moved elsewhere.

Secondly, much has been made of the argument that the population of Harting is larger than that of Elsted and that this justifies closing the latter school and merging it with the former. However, a significant number of children in the Harting catchment area, especially in the north and the east, go to schools other than Harting, notably Rogate and Elsted. This is the parents' choice, and I had always understood that parental choice was a criterion which the Government upheld.

Thirdly, it has become increasingly clear that the motive underlying proposals for the closure of Elsted school and its merger with Harting is not so much educational or financial efficiency as a false assumption that Elsted school enjoys some middle-class snob appeal. The governors of Harting school, in a document setting out their views, said: Regrettably, it has to be stated that there has long been a social cachet attached to attending Elsted school … A merger would end this situation once and for all. Indeed, in a letter to me the rector of Harting and, I believe, chairman of the governors of Harting school, the Reverend K. L. Masters, said: One of the divisions that has festered in this local community has been the separation of children into attending either Elsted or Harting school. That is a problem of which I was made aware even before being instituted as Rector. It has been aggravated over a long time by the efforts of Elsted School parents to persuade any new middle class families in Hafting to send their children to Elsted School without even looking at Harting School. To merge the Schools will be an important step towards overcoming that division. I have a high regard for the rector of Harting. Not for a moment do I question his sincerity or that of his fellow governors. He, understandably and rightly, is concerned to do what is best for his parish, best for the children and best for the parents. However, social engineering is a less than compelling reason for closing a long-established school. Since when were academic excellence and positive parental choice justifications for closure?

I fully appreciate the views of Harting parish council and the governors and parents of Harting school, most of whom support the idea of a merged school. They believe that it would end the uncertainty over the future of the two schools and perhaps lead to a higher average standard of education for the children of both communities. I share those objectives, but I resent the suggestion — presumably promulgated by the local education authority—that one school must close if the other is to survive.

That view pits community against community in a way that might be convenient for the education authority, because it wants the closure proposal to be supported, but it is debilitating for the people affected, who feel threatened and protective towards their community school. The right course should be to preserve both schools, to recognise the wishes and choices of parents in all the parishes affected, to devote the resources necessary to provide comparable and high standards of education, and to preserve the identity and community spirit of rural villages.

I recognise that it is not economic to keep some schools open, especially at a time of falling rolls. My hon. Friend will be the first to remind me of that. Nevertheless, he will recall the pledge that our party made at the general election, that the Government is concerned to ensure that small village schools are not closed, wherever such closures can be avoided. Elsted is just such a case. I would not claim the same for Cocking primary school, whose closure was recommended in the same council resolution. Many councillors recognise this, even though they voted on a composite motion at the county council meeting to close those schools. It is significant that, despite the clear initial view in favour of the closure by the education subcommittee, when the motion came before the full county council the vote was much narrower than had been expected. It was 37 to 28. Considering that county councillors come from all over the county, including areas less familiar with the merits of Elsted school, that was a relatively fine vote and would justify the Secretary of State in taking on board the real concerns that I and others have expressed.

In the light of the further information that I have provided, I hope that my hon. Friend will reprieve the school permanently and not refer the decision to West Sussex county council for further consideration. Mergers have not always achieved the financial or educational results intended. In this case, I am persuaded that the best course is to keep both schools open and distinct.

My hon. Friend is a man of judgment and sensitivity. I have every confidence that he will take on board the points that I have made. If there is one testimony above others which should remove any remaining doubt in my hon. Friend's minds it is that of my constituent Mr. W. F. Perret, whose spastic daughter Sonia passed through Elsted school with flying colours. Mr. Ferret writes: I have been informed that Elsted school might be closed for good. My wife died in September, and now I have to look after my daughter, who went to this school to learn as she is partially handicapped. The teachers and school helped her such a lot that she is now going to Lord Mayor Treloar's college at Alton, Hampshire, and, as you might know, this school helps youngsters to grow up in our society and environment, which has decreased a lot.Our daughter has benefited from going to Elsted school, so why should not other youngsters be able to do the same and learn at a better school rather than grow up to be on the streets, on the dole and fighting each other? It is up to you and your partners to help out to keep one good school open. We all know that the Government is trying to cut costs, but why a small school which helps youngsters around here to grow up and learn a lot? The postscript to that story is that Sonia, who came to Elsted hardly able to walk, feed herself or cope in any way, is now, after seven years of constant help and encouragement from staff and pupils, an articulate girl who can read, write and compute well above average standard. At the end of tern she conducted the leavers' service in front of a full church congregation. No words of mine can match the moving experience of Mr. Ferret and his daughter Sonia. I implore my hon. Friend to save Elsted school.