Question: How concerned are you by the issue of teacher shortages?

Stephen Timms: I'm very concerned by the issue. You no doubt recall there was some controversy earlier in the summer when I said that I thought we would have enough teachers by the beginning of the new term to avoid the disruption to timetables and pupils being sent home at the beginning of the new term. That was being predicted at that time and of course my optimism has actually been born out by events. We haven't had children sent home; we've had all schools offering a full time timetable.

But I know it has required, in some schools, in some parts of the country in some particular subjects a Herculean effort on the part of heads and local education authorities to ensure we didn't have a problem that was being predicted. So I'm pleased the way things have worked out at the beginning of this new term but I do not for one moment deduce from that that we now have enough teachers, or necessarily that we won't hit problems later in the year. Our commitment in the manifesto is to recruit another 10,000 teachers over the lifetime of this Parliament. We've taken a large number of initiatives to ensure we hit that target and I think we're proving quite successful in attracting significantly more people both into teacher training and teaching itself.

The latest thing we've announced is an extension to the graduate teacher programme, which enables people who decide they want to change their career and become teachers, to go into schools and qualify on the job. We've just extended the programme, so that there will be more than 500 places available in January. Existing grants cover training and salary costs and the new grants, introduced in response to requests from headteachers, will cover the training costs with the salary paid by the employee.The other very important issue, I think, is not just recruiting new teachers into the profession but ensuring that we keep those who are already there. There is a high percentage of people who leave the teaching profession early on in their career. There are two things to be said about it - actually there always has been a number of people who leave the profession, and we're underlining that the numbers of people leaving has not risen in recent years, it's actually been remarkably stable for a decade or more, but it's still too high. And I think there is a connection between the problems that are being articulated by teachers around teacher workload and the fact that so many leave. That's why we've taken very seriously the concerns about teacher workload, why we've set up the study which Price Waterhouse Coopers is carrying out for us. We've got a steering group for that study which ministers belong to as do all the teaching unions. And I think they're happy with the way the study is progressing. It will be concluding in November but we have some interim findings from it in the summer really affirming the fact that there are some real pressures here and of course in the White Paper we picked up some of those concerns and set out some of the ways we think we can make some serious inroads in reversing that problem. Things like bringing in extra support staff to relieve teachers of some of the things that are not really teaching but they've had to do up to now because they haven't got anyone else to do it, training a thousand extra bursars, and also learning from schools that seem to manage the workload exceptionally well. And we think there are some issues about good practice there that we've got to see spread to schools that are having more of a problem. So when the report finally comes out in November, no doubt there'll be more we need to say in response to that. It is something we're taking very very seriously.

Question: Where are these problems of teacher shortages most felt - primary schools, secondary schools or regionally where is it? Do we have reliable figures to track the problem?

Stephen Timms: We stayed in close touch with Local Education Authorities throughout the summer to see how the picture was changing. They told us that things were difficult, but they thought they and their schools would cope. Then, in the first week of this term we did a national telephone survey of a sample of schools, as we did last year. That suggested that the overall picture, in terms of actual vacancies, was close to last year's - slightly worse in some places, slightly better in others. In broad terms the biggest problems are in secondary schools, rather than primary, although that's not to say there aren't any problems in primary schools - there are, but the biggest problems are in secondary schools. And they are particularly associated with some subjects, maths and science most obviously. And they are particularly acute in areas like the south-east, especially where housing is so expensive.

Question: You've put in measures to help teachers such as housing for teachers in the south-east, but if research reveals the situation is getting worse for teachers in the south-east are you willing to go back to that and see what else you could do to try and support teachers in those areas?

Stephen Timms: Well we will certainly keep all of this very closely under review. We've announced the details of the starter home initiative. I'm optimistic about what that's going to deliver for us, although clearly we need to see how it goes and we will certainly keep it under review.

The other issue here is teacher pay where we've made very good progress in the last three or four years. The average pay of a teacher is about 25 per cent higher now in cash terms than it was four years ago. That's a significant boost.

Question: But now they're calling for a 10 per cent pay increase. Is that realistic?

Stephen Timms: Well, no doubt those who are calling for that will put their evidence to the school teachers review body. We will do the same and we'll see what the STRB says. That's the next thing to do.

Question: How does teachers' pay in the state sector compare with that in the independent sector?

Stephen Timms: I haven't seen the data for the independent sector. I've heard reports of the independent sector being under pressure somewhat because of the relatively large increases in teacher pay in the maintained sector - it has had a knock on effect on the independent sector.

Question: What about the quality of teachers that schools have drafted in to plug the gaps. Are you concerned about the quality?

Stephen Timms: Well yes, we're always concerned about teacher quality and it's something that we watch carefully. The evidence from Ofsted is there has been a very significant improvement in teaching standards over the last three or four years. Their last report showed in 1995 80 per cent of lessons, were satisfactory or better. In the last year that was up to 95 per cent. So there has been a really very significant improvement in teacher quality over that period. All the evidence that I'm seeing, including that from Ofsted, but also from what head teachers are saying, is that the calibre of the newly qualified teachers coming into the profession at the moment is higher than it's ever been and I think that's a reflection on some very good progress in teacher training institutions. So the pointers on teacher quality are all actually very encouraging.

Question: What about the situation where schools are drafting in a significant number of overseas teachers?

Stephen Timms: Well again we've always had overseas teachers coming into the UK, they spend some time here, get some experience and then go back to their own countries and teach there and are better for the experience, and also the other way round - we have British trained teachers going overseas for a few years and then coming back. So my view is that the overseas trained teachers that we have are making a very good contribution. There are anecdotal reports and I think there was a suggestion in the Times Education Supplement that some heads have appointed teachers that they don't have very much confidence in. Well I hope there hasn't been very much of that. I'd be surprised if there has been and I think the Secondary Heads Association distanced itself from that report. Of course we will keep this very closely under review but actually these pressures aren't new, they were big pressures last year as well but the indications are that things are actually getting better not worse. And it's very important that they should do.

Question: Critics of your recent White Paper say that the funding given to specialist schools and the element of selection will result in a two-tier education system. How do you respond to that?

Stephen Timms: I think the first point to make is that we have a very clear aspiration in this White Paper which is to establish a modern and effective comprehensive system in which every community in the country has confidence.

There is a view that the way to get that comprehensive system that everybody has confidence in, is uniformity everywhere. That is not our view. I think frankly the lesson from experience is that it isn't the way to achieve the truly comprehensive system that we want. What we need is diversity. Different kinds of provision, different approaches, different models, different specialities within schools, but every school encouraged to develop its own character and ethos so that every pupil can take pride in their school because it excels in a particular respect. So I see diversity as being the route to the comprehensive system that we want, not uniformity.

Now are we heading into a route which is about selection? Well I really think this is a red herring. It is the case that in the specialities that we've already established it is permissible for specialist schools to select 10 per cent of their cohort by aptitude - not by ability but by aptitude. In reality we know that of those comprehensive schools that have become specialist schools, only 7 per cent of them are exercising that ability that they have. So if you multiply 10 per cent by 7 per cent, you're left with three quarters of one per cent roughly of the youngsters who are in specialist schools that are being selected. Really it is a tiny, tiny proportion. Sure we can have a debate. There may well be people who argue that even that degree of selection shouldn't be there. We can have a debate about that, but to say that the whole of the specialist schools system is about selection is clearly complete rubbish. It's just not true. 93 per cent of schools that we're talking about don't have any aptitude selection at all, so I hope it's very clear that this is not about introducing greater selection.

What it is about is about giving each school this identity and character of its own and the evidence is pretty clear that the process of developing a sense of identity, and also of adopting the target setting procedure that goes with becoming a specialist school, because it's quite a rigorous process schools have to go through, that all of that is very effective in raising the levels of achievement in the schools and improving them.

Question: Some see specialists schools as receiving more funding?

Stephen Timms: Well it is the case that there is additional funding attached to specialist schools, but we always made it clear that the very substantial extra investments that we are making in education have to be matched by improvements and reform. This has to be a something for something process. We are making unprecendentedly large additional investments in schools this year and next year and the year after. It's absolutely vital for us that we're able to point to demonstrable improvements that have resulted in that extra investment. In three years time, if you look back at what's happened in education in that time, I think it's going to be really difficult to claim that the problem was the government didn't spend enough. The fact is we will, by that time, have had unprecedentedly large extra increases in education spending in successive years in a way that we've probably never ever had before.

We are clear that these very substantial extra investments we're making must be matched with real improvements. Any school at all can apply to become a specialist school, and increasingly we want more and more of them to do so. We expect about half of them to be able to do that by 2005 which is a pretty demanding pace of spreading the specialist school designation. And we know from all the evidence that by going through that process, they will be serving their kids better than they were before they were specialist schools. And so that's money well spent from our point of view. And I don't think it is the case that simply spraying the money round to everybody and saying do what you want with it will necessarily have that effect.

Question: Some of your party colleagues such as Frank Dobson say that your plans to extend single faith schools could ferment racial tensions especially in the wake of terrorist attacks in America.

Stephen Timms: Well let me answer that in two ways. First of all in my constituency in Newham in East London in the past we have had a chronic problem of underachievement of a kind that is all too common around the UK particularly in inner city areas like mine but in other areas as well. But in my borough the two schools that do the best are both Roman Catholic schools. Some people say to me that what actually happens with church schools is that they cream off middle class youngsters and that's why they do better. But that's not the case in Newham. Actually the boys' school which is 75 per cent GCSE A*s to Cs - the best results in the borough - has 70 per cent afro-Caribbean boys in its cohort, exactly the group that we have the most serious problems nationally with underachievement. This is not a unique example - there is good evidence that faith schools are able to do particularly well especially with some of the most disadvantaged young people. We're not going to be imposing them, coming along and saying you must have a faith school at all. But what we are saying is that if there is a broad demand from the community then it should be possible to facilitate that and not unnecessarily block it, given that the evidence is that many of these schools are doing particularly well. Faith schools command very strong support from parents and we know that having parents enthusiastically supporting a school is an important element in the schools succeeding too.

Now of course there are concerns about divisiveness in the light of what's happening in Northern Ireland and in the light of what's happened in the US in the last couple of weeks. We do though have a long tradition of inclusive faith schools in the UK which have not caused this kind of divisiveness and I don't think it is right to assume that new faith schools would do so either. And added to that we've made it clear in the White Paper that we would want new faith schools to be establishing good strong partnerships with schools of other faiths, and schools of no faith. That is a theme of the White Paper - schools working together.

Question: So they have to promote some sort of integration?

Stephen Timms: Yes, indeed. And I think that way we will be able to allay the concerns that there might well be on this divisiveness point. And I understand those concerns obviously in the light of what's happened.

Question: In the summer you talked about the possibility of the private sector coming in to manage specific school departments but this didn't appear in the White Paper. Is this a realistic concept and what sort of time frame do you expect on that?

Stephen Timms: The White Paper is very clear that we want it to be possible for head teachers to pull every lever that could help them raise the level of achievement in their school, and we want them to be able to work with other schools. We want them to be able to work with further education colleges and we will remove some regulatory obstacles currently preventing them from doing that. We want schools to be able to work with voluntary sector organisations if that is going to assist a school with a particular area of its work, and equally we want it to be possible for schools to work with the private sector. And that is made clear in the White Paper, exactly consistently with what I said earlier in the summer. But what I said earlier in the summer and what the White Paper makes clear is that the vital thing is that this is for head teachers to decide. Again, we're not going to promote this. It will be for head teachers to decide what is going to help their school. And our concern is that they should not be unduly hindered from taking a particular form of partnership forward if that's what they've identified as a way forward for them. Now yes I think it may well be that there would be head teachers who would find that kind of relationship with a private sector institution attractive. But the point I want to emphasise is that there are lots of other kinds of partnerships that the White Paper is talking about and the important thing is that head teachers should be able to set those up.

Question: So you wouldn't rule out the concept of an organisation getting involved in running a department?

Stephen Timms: No certainly not. Heads might see a real advantage in working with another local school or college, for example, with real strengths in one particular subject. The White Paper makes it clear that we would not want there to be obstacles to that kind of arrangement being put in place if that's what the head teacher identified as right.

Question: What kind of mechanism would there be if a head teacher thought some partnership would be useful, but perhaps you didn't? Would the government step in and say perhaps you shouldn't get involved with a particular organisation?

Stephen Timms: Well assuming that there are no problems with propriety or anything of that sort, I would not envisage us wanting to impede that kind of relationship with the school if the governors have decided that is the way to improve the standards of performance in the school.

Question: We hear reports that teachers are increasingly stressed by the misbehaviour of pupils in schools. How serious a problem is this and what can the government do about it?

Stephen Timms: Our moves to support teachers needs to encompass addressing the problem of bad behaviour. I think it is one of the issues that's around the retention problem at the moment. The White Paper has proposed to expand the number of learning support units which tackle bad behaviour in schools so that youngsters can be taken out of a classroom when they are disrupting a lesson, and receive a separate education for a few weeks. But what used to happen was kids would be taken out of school and then that was it. And if they were lucky they may get an hour or two teaching a week but otherwise they were left to roam the streets. And that was catastrophic. What we're ensuring is that youngsters, if they're taken out of the classroom, are taught in a learning support unit and not left to roam the streets. We are also looking at legislation to ensure that parents take more responsibility for their children's behaviour.

Question: Would that involve formal contracts between parent, teacher and pupil?

Stephen Timms: There is already a home school agreement which a school must draw up in consultation with parents, setting out in fairly simple and straightforward terms their respective roles and responsibilities in the education of children. It can cover aspects like ensuring a child attends school and supporting the school in maintaining good behaviour and discipline. This isn't a formal contract and parents don't have to sign it, but a school should encourage them to sign this once it is agreed so they know where they stand. Pupils can sign it as well. This agreement helps to establish the right sort of ethos when schools and parents talk to each other.

Question: Is there an argument for parenting classes perhaps?

Stephen Timms: Well I think there are situations in which work with parents of a variety of kinds is likely to be helpful. I think the parenting order is potentially quite an effective measure for incidents in school as they involve classes in better parenting. We've recently been consulting on a wider use of parenting orders.

Question: We've talked about teacher workload, pay and discipline - which is your top priority to tackle to ensure teachers stay in the classroom?

Stephen Timms: I think the highest priority at the moment is addressing the concerns about workload. As I've said we're doing a lot on recruitment but on retention, it's addressing workload that I see as the number one pursuit at the moment.

Question: Where's the proof that improvements are coming through?

Stephen Timms: We've seen some dramatic improvements in standards in primary schools over the last four years. That was our number one focus. There's still some way to go there, we're not there yet but nevertheless there have been dramatic improvements and what secondary school teachers tell me is they can see the difference in the youngsters reaching them now. Kids coming now can read better, they are much more able numerically, they are more articulate, they are more confident, they are much more able to take the full advantages of a secondary education than was the case four years ago. And I really do think that has been a tremendously significant achievement in the last four years. What we have to do now is to build on that at the secondary level. There has been progress, standards have risen in secondary schools in the last four years, but there's quite some way to go to achieve the same order of transformation that we have seen in primary schools. There is some evidence even that some of the kids have slipped back a bit once they get to their secondary school, the pace slows down, they're not stimulated as much as they were in their primary school, we start to lose some kids around 13 or 14. So we're introducing what we're calling our key stage 3 strategy to build up the pace and learn from the successes of what's happened in primary schools and apply that in secondary schools.

Question: So what are we talking about in terms of time - we've seen successes in primary schools in 4 years, so secondary schools - improvements in 10 years?

Stephen Timms: It depends what you mean by the term success. The key stage 3 strategy is being rolled out now so I would expect to see some really positive gains from this year's intake's key stage 3 in 3 years time. Some of the changes we're talking about in the White Paper will take up to 10 years. I think the full implementation of the 14 to 19 strategies that we've set out, and which we'll be talking about early in the new year, could well take 10 years to bring about. So it's a progressive process but I'm expecting to see significant evidence of real change for the better.