Sport in Schools

Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 10:15 pm on 28 February 1991.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Robert Atkins Mr Robert Atkins , South Ribble 10:15, 28 February 1991

First, I congratulate the hon. Member for Stalybridge and Hyde (Mr. Pendry) on obtaining an opportunity to raise the matter of sport in schools. He has a well-deserved reputation for knowing a considerable amount about sport. Therefore, I find it extraordinary that he raises matters which simply conflict with the facts as I am learning them in this job.

We agree that there is some element of problem in sports in schools—I shall address that in a moment—but I find it a bit rich that the hon. Gentleman and his party suggest that any lack of competitive sport in schools is the fault of the Government, when many Labour education authorities around the country have taken against competitive team sports in schools and contributed signally to a reduction in competitive sport in schools by so doing. When we attribute blame, we should do so fairly.

I now wish to talk about the issues as I see them. The hon. Gentleman will understand that I cannot deal with all of them in the space of a brief Adjournment debate. None the less, I shall do what I can.

Sport in schools is undoubtedly the foundation for continued sporting activity by millions of young people in adult life. It is also the basis of excellence in sporting achievement. The majority of those who excel at particular sports have developed their skill while at school. Therefore, we cannot underestimate the importance of providing young people with a wide range of sporting opportunities during their time at school, for it is the linchpin on which depends the development of health life styles by the population as a whole and determines in large part the success or failure of our international sports men and women.

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman does not accept that my move to the Department of Education and Science clearly demonstrates the importance that the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State attach to sport in schools. Of course I recognise that the transfer of responsibilities alone is meaningless without policies and actions to back it up. None the less, I hope that he will feel that, during the time that I hold this office, I demonstrate to him and the sporting world that the move will benefit sport, rather than the reverse.

Perhaps the most important limb of our policy on school sport, on which the hon. Gentleman spoke at some length, is the inclusion of physical education in the national curriculum. PE is now a compulsory subject for all pupils in maintained schools between the ages of five and 16. It is the first time that PE has been a statutory requirement. The Government resisted pressures to make the subject optional, particularly at key stage 4 of the national curriculum. That is the first achievement that I and the Secretary of State made since our move to the Department of Education and Science.

Of course, a distinction must be made between what we mean by physical education in the curriculum and the overall place of sport in schools. There is no doubt that PE should include a significant amount of sport, including competitive team games. I was glad to see a recognition of that in the interim report of the PE working group, which stated: we regard competitive games, both individual and team, as an essential part of physical education. These elements of physical education were addressed in different ways in the interim report of the PE working group.

The hon. Gentleman painted an unnecessarily negative picture of what the Secretary of State said on that interim report. It was inevitable that the Secretary of State would respond on matters which caused him anxiety, rather than matters with which he agreed. The working party is fully apprised of the position by me and the Secretary of State, and is aware that we believe that the objective of elevating the status of physical education and especially of PE teachers is paramount if we are to address the subject properly in future.

The arguments which the Secretary of State raised dealt with the language used. I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's comments or those in the letter which he quoted that we were being patronising by suggesting that the language of the report needed to be that which ordinary parents and the constituents of both the hon. Gentleman and myself could understand. But the objective of the report is one with which we do not disagree.

The report made a number of recommendations which would have considerable resource implications were they to be implemented in full—relating, for example, to a recommended residential experience for all pupils, as well as dance, outdoor education and swimming tuition, all being statutory requirements within the national curriculum. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government recognise only too well the full and important value of all those activities, but we do not believe that residential experience needs to be compulsory, whether in PE or in any other area of the curriculum.

In my view, it would have been utterly irresponsible for the Government to have accepted those recommendations without any understanding of the costs involved. It would also have been foolhardy in the extreme. Perhaps it would not be surprising for the Opposition to commit so willingly the taxpayers' money without any appreciation of the sums involved. The House will appreciate that the Government do not act in the profligate way in which spokesmen for the Opposition frequently do when seeking to attract the electorate, offering promises that they have not costed.

I look forward to receiving the final recommendations of the working group in due course. They are to be submitted to the Secretary of State by the end of June of this year. The interim report has now been issued for consultation. I am confident that the report will generate comments from a wide range of interests and that the eventual outcome will be significantly to raise the standard of physical education, including sport, provided in our schools.

While provision in some schools is already of a high standard, there is no doubt that the quantity and quality overall is not at the level that we would wish. The introduction of the national curriculum is all about raising standards in all schools to those of the best. I am sure that that will be achieved for physical education in the same way as for any other subject.

I am concerned not only with PE and sport in the school curriculum. I want to see an increasing range of opportunities for young people to take part in sport outside the curriculum. Concerns have been expressed, inside and outside the House, about the decline in extra-curricular school sport. That is one reason why sport for young people is one of the main issues being considered as part of my current review of sports policy. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware from what has been said on previous occasions when he has raised the matter, the position of the Minister of Sport, whoever he or she may be, is one of those considerations, and I am always grateful for any suggestion that can elevate my status, if not my pay.

Before we provide the answers, we need to acknowledge some of the reasons for the present situation. I recognise that, over the years, there has been a reduction in the amount of time that teachers have felt able to devote on a voluntary basis to providing sports opportunities outside school hours. That is not to say that such activity no longer takes place. On the contrary, many teachers continue to be heavily involved, and I take this opportunity—as I have on previous occasions, and will continue to do—to pay tribute to the many teachers, PE teachers or not, and often not, who devote a great deal of time, at times when it is not always convenient to them, to encouraging, coaching and training youngsters after school. I recognise that dedication, and all those involved in sport generally understand and appreciate it highly.

Even so, there has been a reduction in that area of activity, and it is a cause for some concern. One factor is the pupils themselves. I know, as the parent of a 15-year-old daughter, that for her and her friends, there is a wide range of opportunities available outside their activities in school. Many of them have Saturday jobs, while others take advantage of local community schemes or join the junior sections of their local clubs. We do not want to discourage any of those activities, but we must recognise that they are increasingly militating against pupils being involved in school-based activities, particularly out of hours.

Various ways forward have been proposed. The introduction of directed time has prompted suggestions that teachers should receive extra payment for undertaking extra-curricular sporting activities. Teachers have traditionally been involved in extra-curricular sport, as I said, and I see no reason why that should not continue, but we have also given local authorities and, where appropriate, school governing bodies the power to award teachers taking on extra responsibilities one of five incentive allowances worth up to £5,500, which will rise to just over £7,000 from 1 December of this year. Organising and supervising sporting activities might be one of the responsibilities to which I referred, and the opportunity is there for financial recognition to be given.

However, we need to widen the focus of the debate beyond the teacher and the school. We cannot turn back the clock to the days, if they ever existed, when schools carried the sole responsibility for providing sporting opportunities outside the school day. I want to encourage even greater diversity of provision involving local sports clubs, leisure centres, local industry and, of course, organisations such as the Sports Council.

Much excellent work is already going on and we should not underestimate that when addressing the problems. The Lawn Tennis Association Trust is promoting short tennis in schools and sports clubs across the country. The Rugby Football Union is currently spending more than £1 million a year promoting the game among young people, contributing to the cost of 20 youth development officers. In London the London Community Cricket Association, whose tie I am proud to wear, with help from the Sports Council, employs three development officers. They are working with primary and middle schools in inner-city areas to introduce pupils to cricket through programmes of indoor coaching throughout the winter. The LCCA deserves to be congratulated on that.

I want to see further such schemes, and I am looking at what more can be done to encourage that to happen. With this and other issues in mind, we will shortly invite a range of organisations involved in both physical education and sport to a consultative conference on sport and young people. That will allow people with a wide variety of interests and activities to express their point of view to me and the Secretary of State. I hope that we will be able to build on that.