Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 5:07 pm on 24 January 2017.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, for the opportunity to ask a few questions, if there’s any time left to do so.
I too start with this issue of evidence, because some quotes have been provided—and some of them I intended to refer to—but you did admit that this was no magic bullet, and I understand that. But we are in a situation where resources are scarce and therefore we have to prioritise resources where we’re confident they will have the greatest possible impact. Therefore, the weight of evidence, in my view, suggests that there are far more magic bullets that you could be firing with £36 million.
Now, I was going to quote Estyn, and this is very timely bearing in mind the report that we’ve seen published today, with an emphasis on improving standards as a strategically important issue. But, of course, I am slightly shocked that you have to rely on an Estyn report from 2003. That was almost in another age. I was still using a fax machine in those days, and the world has changed since then. Certainly, that report wouldn’t be the basis for the proposal before us today. If I recall correctly, in 2003 the Liberal Democrats were responsible for education in the Welsh Government, so if it was such an issue at that point, then it is regrettable that they didn’t decide to tackle it at that time. They were certainly in Government in 2003. [Interruption.] Well, it isn’t my debate; you can respond when your time comes.
The Labour manifesto committed to spend £100 million on improving standards. Can you confirm once and for all that the £36 million that you announced yesterday, but you are informing us of in the Chamber today, will come from that figure? I ask because we know what the view of some Labour Assembly Members is about the prospect of using those funds to this end. It is something that was criticised harshly by many of them last year.
Now, there is some evidence that states that if you do get the class size down to 20 or fewer, then you will possibly see some impact, some real impact. Now, according to your manifesto, of course, as a Liberal Democrat, you set a target of 25 for class sizes. It isn’t explicit in this statement, I have to say—can you confirm that that is still the target? Can you confirm that you won’t support bids, for example, unless they actually lead to an outcome of a class smaller than 25? Can you also tell us that it is your intention to roll this out ultimately across Wales and by when you would expect or hope to achieve that?
You also say in your statement that the evidence suggests—and it’s evidence according to you—that an investment such as this does have the greatest impact on enhancing attainment in the early years. I don’t see this statement being explicit that the funding available is specifically for the early years. Certainly, it isn’t one of the elements in the criteria. I assume that you would want to confirm if you are targeting the early years only; otherwise, of course, you are admitting that you are not using the funding to its most effective purpose.
There is a bare figure of £36 million in the statement. It appears as though there have been some press reports as to the profile of that expenditure. It is certainly not included in the statement, and it’s not in any information that I’ve received as an Assembly Member on this issue. I understand that there is a capital-revenue split; reference has been made to that, and I think you were asked on what basis that was done, but I’m not sure if I heard an answer to that. And there is this question as to the sustainability of the investment, which is another issue where we need greater clarity. The word ‘sustainability’ appears in the statement, but aren’t you saying that you’re expecting the schools to pay, ultimately? Shouldn’t you say that clearly if that’s the case? It appears to me that this funding is for a specific period and, after that, that investment will ultimately become a cut, and we will lose the value of the investment unless the local authority or the individual school can continue to make those payments themselves.
Finally from me—and I’ve raised this with you previously in the committee—is there a risk that you will see not smaller class sizes, but more teaching assistants? I know of some examples, and I know that there’s an element of capital spend here, but I know that there are a number of schools where they simply don’t have the space for provision beyond the classes that they currently have. I don’t think that the capital sum put forward here is sufficient to meet the needs—you may agree with that—and I would like to know whether there is any strategic relationship between the capital funding you refer to here and the twenty-first century schools programme, because in the majority of schools, I believe, where there are such limitations, it is capital problems that account for them very often.