Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Education

Oral Answers to Questions

Phil Wilson Excerpts
Monday 20th December 2010

(13 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nick Gibb Portrait Mr Gibb
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is absolutely right and it is disappointing that too few young people study the three separate sciences—biology, chemistry and physics—through to GCSE. That is why we have introduced the concept of an English baccalaureate: to encourage a broad range of academic subjects to be taught and taken up to the age of 16, particularly in maths and the other STEM subjects.

Phil Wilson Portrait Phil Wilson (Sedgefield) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

5. What plans he has to ensure the availability of high-quality, affordable child care in all areas.

Sarah Teather Portrait The Minister of State, Department for Education (Sarah Teather)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Local authorities have statutory duties to secure sufficient child care for working parents and to assess child care provision in their area. They also have a duty to secure 15 hours a week of free nursery education for 38 weeks per year for all three and four-year-olds. Statutory guidance requires local authorities to take into account the quality, flexibility and accessibility of places and the range of provision available to meet the needs of parents.

Phil Wilson Portrait Phil Wilson
- Hansard - -

What assessment has the Minister made of the effects of removing the requirement from Sure Start children’s centres to provide child care?

Sarah Teather Portrait Sarah Teather
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That has not happened. What has been removed is the requirement to provide full day-care services in the most disadvantaged areas. We have done that because early-years providers have consistently told us that in some areas the demand is not there. When that happens, children’s centres find that they have to subsidise child care, or at least empty places, at the expense of providing early-intervention programmes that might have made a real difference for those families. This is simply about providing flexibility. In areas where demand continues, I would expect local authorities to want their children’s centres to go on providing that service, but where the demand is not there, it does not make sense to divert money that could be better spent.