Music and Dance Schools: Affordable Access
Lord Blackwell
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether they are committed to maintaining affordable access to specialist music and dance schools for talented children of all social backgrounds.
Captain of the King’s Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard and Deputy Chief Whip (Baroness Wheeler) (Lab)
My Lords, just before the noble Lord, Lord Blackwell, starts, I emphasise that the timings on this debate are very tight. Most speakers have two minutes, so can noble Lords please stick within that, so that everybody can be heard and the Minister can have adequate time to respond.
Lord Blackwell (Con)
My Lords, my purpose in raising this question is to highlight the vital role of MDS, the music and dance scheme, which provides means-tested support to enable exceptionally talented young children from all backgrounds to attend specialist music and dance schools. I should draw attention to my interest as governor of the Yehudi Menuhin School and the Royal Academy of Music, both of which have students who participate in this scheme.
There are a handful of specialist music and dance schools in the UK that take exceptionally talented and highly committed youngsters and provide them with the advanced tuition they need to achieve their potential. The children who attend are at the very top of their peer group, and most go on to make careers as acknowledged leaders in the music and dance professions. To fulfil their mission, these schools aim to take the highest-potential children regardless of their social background and financial means. The intense specialist education that these schools provide, mostly within a boarding environment, is expensive and beyond the means of all but a few parents. The boarding fees at the Menuhin school, for example, are almost £50,000 a year—and that does not cover the full cost. Musical talent is not restricted to wealthy families, and the music and dance scheme provides the financial support that is essential to enable talented children from any background to attend. Therefore, while these schools are classed as independent schools, they are not the preserve of rich, privileged kids.
At the Menuhin school, for example, only a handful—under 10%—pay the full fees, and they have to earn their place on ability just like every other pupil. The other 90% can benefit from this special environment only because of the financial support they receive from MDS, together with the bursaries funded by charitable donations. Without MDS funding, some of these schools would no longer be financially viable. Unlike many private schools, with such a limited number of full-fee payers, they cannot simply expand the number of pupils paying full fees and raise enough money to subsidise scholarships to those from poor families. Further, any lowering of standards to accept wealthy children who do not have the talent or commitment to reach the top of their profession would not be fair to those children, putting them in an environment where they were unlikely to succeed. Nor is it realistic to make up any shortfall through more charitable donations. Every one of these schools is already struggling to raise enough funds to fill the hole in their finances, and they do not have massive endowments.
After several years of zero or limited increases in the MDS funding, we are now approaching a crisis point. Over the past 10 years, the real value of fees funded by MDS has fallen by more than 15%. On top of general inflation, in the last year these schools have been hit with the additional costs from the loss of business rates relief, higher national insurance contributions and VAT on fees. Responding to an Oral Question in June, the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Malvern, made clear her personal commitment to the long-running MDS scheme, and I welcome her success in securing this year’s MDS funding in last year’s settlement. However, whereas historically, schools received a three-year settlement, there has been no assurance that the funding will continue beyond this year. The absence of a firm commitment to future funding at a level that makes these schools financially viable is putting them, and the parents of their children, in an impossible position, with no certainty for some of them about whether they will be able to continue.
To lose these schools would be a tragedy not just for the exceptional youngsters from all backgrounds who benefit from their unique support, but for the artistic calibre of the country in the years ahead. The Government have declared that creative industries will be at the heart of their industrial strategy, and their sector plan set out a commitment to back the next generation of British talent. The Government’s support for music hubs to broaden access to music education is welcome, but it does not replace the role of the MDS. As with sports, we need to support excellence in every field of artistic endeavour not just for those individuals but for the leadership and aspiration that they transmit in raising standards across the board. The outreach programmes of these schools are also very important and complementary in delivering this.
I understand the constraints around budget decisions, particularly in the current environment. However, the cost of this vital support—some £36 million a year, including the cost of the advanced training centres—is small change in the budget ledgers. In responding to this debate, I hope that the noble Baroness, Lady Blake, will put on record the Government’s commitment to maintain the MDS at a level of funding that will ensure the future of these small but precious schools, and that we see that reflected in next month’s Budget announcements. I thank other noble Lords for their interest in this debate and look forward to hearing the Government’s response.
Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe (Lab)
My Lords, clarity on the future of the music and dance scheme to ensure access to specialist music and dance education for students, regardless of their background, is urgently needed. As a supporter of the National Youth Orchestra, I wholeheartedly support the points from the noble Lord, Lord Blackwell, but I put in a plea to ensure that all our youngsters have a high-quality creative arts education in primary school and on through secondary school.
Music education is in a parlous state in many mainstream schools. Many commentators have pointed to the absence of the arts from the English baccalaureate as a key reason for the decline in these subjects in our schools. Secondary schools are measured on the number of pupils who take GCSEs in these core subjects. Another measure, Progress 8, introduced in 2016, adds further pressure to prioritise EBacc subjects. Neither the EBacc nor Progress 8 specifies music, dance or drama in their assessments. Since 2010—the year that the EBacc was introduced—there has been a 42% drop in overall arts subjects and GCSE entries in music in England have fallen 25%. Music A-level entries to England fell for the third consecutive year.
The EBacc has made art subjects an add-on with which schools can dispense, yet teachers tell me that music is often now the only subject where an entire classroom of 30 students work together as one, building collaborative skills and social confidence. Music develops creative intelligence; our creative industries start in the classroom.
Will the Minister assure us that creative subjects will be properly recognised in the anticipated curriculum and assessment review? The recent £88 million “Building Creative Futures” package is encouraging, but to ensure that every child has access to a high-quality music and arts education in school requires concrete action, not just good intentions. Will my noble friend the Minister start by putting the arts back into the EBacc?
Baroness Bull (CB)
My Lords, I speak in this short debate as someone who owes her career to a predecessor of today’s music and dance scheme. I will focus my time on what it takes to achieve that success in the highly specialised field of dance. Without that understanding, it is easy to underestimate the importance of the MDS.
Elite performance—and I use that word as we do for athletes—is performance at the limits of human potential, characterised by extreme flexibility, accuracy and speed. It is achieved only through 10 years of intense daily practice under expert tuition in specialist facilities; those 10 years have to start before puberty sets in if a dancer is going to compete in a global market. It is not just about physical prowess; it is about training the brain to send precise movement commands and issue corrections faster than the human eye can see. When you watch an expert dancer, you are seeing the cerebellum at its most extraordinary.
This intensity of training is impossible to achieve within the state school system, which does not have the teachers, the spaces or the hours in the day. And it is expensive; without government support, it is beyond the reach of many talented children. Over 50 years, Governments have recognised this through the music and dance scheme, which allows specialist schools to trawl wide and offer places on talent alone, blind to financial or social circumstances.
The Prime Minister has often said, “Talent is everywhere, opportunity is not”. The MDS schools offer that opportunity but 12 years of funding freezes mean that it is a system under strain. I therefore ask the Minister to press the Treasury to deliver the £4 million the schools need and restore the three-year settlements so that the schools can plan efficiently and children can be confident of completing the training they begin.
Without this investment, the scheme is at risk. This risks not only the talent pipeline that underpins the UK’s global creative success but a return to a world in which only the most advantaged can access the opportunities their talent deserves. I feel sure that the Minister does not want this to be the legacy of her party’s years in power.
Baroness Bottomley of Nettlestone (Con)
I send my warmest congratulations to my noble friend Lord Blackwell and my appreciation of his dedicated service at the Yehudi Menuhin School. It is always a privilege to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Bull, who was principal dancer at the Royal Opera House when I was Secretary of State in the mid-1990s. She is a wonderful advocate for dance; it is always so important to remember that dance matters quite as much as music.
It was a privilege to be Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, but I am aware that whereas on the sport side there was a real commitment to investing in creating international excellence and successful Olympiads, on the music, dance and arts side, much went into restoring our wonderful institutions, doing what Sir Ernest Hall called creating the “national treasure houses”. As he said, the National Lottery did for the arts and culture what the Medicis did for the cultural treasure houses in Florence. We did not focus on the pipeline, however, and that is the critical issue now.
Talent is everywhere; regrettably, opportunity is not. The 2024 Sutton Trust report on social mobility and the creative industries is a call to action. Privately educated students represent more than half the students at the most prestigious conservatoires. At Oxford, Cambridge, King’s College and Bath, more than half the creative students came from upper middle-class backgrounds. At Hull, where I had the joy of being chancellor for 17 years and which has a top 10 music school and a very impressive dance school, it was better but not good enough. Among under-35s, there are four times as many individuals from middle-class backgrounds in the creative industries. We have to do better to extend opportunity. The Sutton Trust calls for an arts premium to fund arts opportunities. I ask the Government: what is their practical action?
Malcolm Gladwell refers in Outliers: The Story of Success to the 10,000 hour rule: to become an expert, an elite performer requires 10,000 hours of practice. How can the Government help us to ensure that for the young people of the future?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Lab)
My Lords, I have worked to ensure access to excellent education for talented children from all social backgrounds, and specialist music and dance schools are no different. As a society, we have a duty to break down barriers that prevent young people from underrepresented backgrounds—working-class kids—achieving their potential in the subjects in which they have exceptional talent. Education transforms lives, enables social mobility and is a great way of investing in our economy and future growth. My friend Natasha Kaplinsky, chair of the Royal Ballet School, brought this issue to my attention. The school is a shining example of excellence and accessibility. However, it has great financial challenges.
I particularly like the title of the MDS paper, Supporting Potential Before Privilege. It is clear that we have to do this both to ensure fulfilment and success for the students themselves, and to safeguard the domestic talent pipeline for the creative sector, which contributes such a vast amount of money to the Exchequer, as well as providing thousands of jobs.
To sustain the success of our creative industries, we must nurture talent and develop skills. The UK’s status as a global creative superpower, of which I am hugely proud, is only as good as the talent that underpins it. The education that students receive in the music and dance schools simply cannot be provided in mainstream schools, and it must be protected. Financial support is critical to ensure that talented children and young people from all backgrounds can become the stellar performers of the future. It is also vital to enhance the resilience of the schools. I therefore strongly support calls on the Treasury to provide an uplift of £4 million to the current MDS settlement, and I support restoring three-year MDS grant agreements from the DfE. It would be a tragedy if not only was access limited but schools themselves had to close.
Lord Vaizey of Didcot (Con)
My Lords, there were comments last week about Canterbury Cathedral posting graffiti in the great cathedral as part of an exhibition to attract young people. Many people saw as it as an act of great vandalism. I rather saw it as quite avant-garde, experimental and exciting, but that is an aside.
I hope that by securing the music and dance scheme, we ensure that we do not commit an act of vandalism against one of the great music traditions in this country, which is, of course, English choral music. I can use the opportunity of this very brief speech to praise the Church of England for its support of English music. We have more than 2,000 choristers and more than 207 cathedral choirs. When I was in the other place, I was lucky enough to represent a constituency that had chalk streams in it, a unique geographical feature of England and northern France, and we fought hard to preserve them. We must not inadvertently lose one of the most important music traditions in this country.
In many respects, this debate is a metaphor for all Governments’ approaches to the arts. Nobody is suggesting that the music and dance scheme is under fundamental threat. It is part of the Government’s national music plan. It is ably supported by £34 million of funding. The message that goes out today from this debate, as it should for the arts in general, is: please may we have long-term funding rather than just one-year grants, which are impossible to manage? Three-year grants are not too much of an ask. Please, can we stop nickel-and-diming the arts budget? It is a pinprick on the Government’s budget. The budget for the music and dance scheme is a pinprick on their budget but the rewards are almost limitless.
The Earl of Clancarty (CB)
My Lords, at this moment in the Government’s lifetime it feels important to make, or at least re-emphasise, some basic points. The arts, as opposed to the wider creative industries, are themselves an engine of growth. The more financial support there is from the Government, the more jobs are created and the greater the financial rewards, many times over, for the Treasury. This is aside from the democratic necessity of both the arts and arts education, which are part of the same ecology. I say this now because of the very worrying signs that this message about the importance of the arts to the industrial strategy is simply not getting through.
The signs include the hugely disappointing cuts to DCMS funding, which, as has been said, are drops in the ocean in relation to overall Treasury funding; the decision to stop state funding of the international baccalaureate, which is so important for the arts and critical thinking; and the complete axing of ITT bursaries for all arts subjects, including music, which the Independent Society of Musicians described as a damaging decision just before the final report of the curriculum review. These savings are false savings; they save very little money but are potentially devastating for the arts. With the eight music and dance schools in England, we are talking about the achievement of excellence in the arts alongside an inherent commitment to social mobility, a double whammy in a good way, and a no-brainer, surely, for the £4 million funding required to enable these schools just to survive. This is yet another test case of how much this Government are willing to make that commitment to invest in the arts that the Prime Minister himself promised for both the arts and arts education 18 months ago.
Lord Liddle (Lab)
My Lords, first, I must say how much we miss Lord Lipsey in this debate as he was totally committed to the cause that we are discussing today. I support those who have spoken eloquently in favour of the future of the music and dance scheme and scholarships. My wife was for several years managing director of the English National Ballet and then went on to serve on its board for many years, and I know Caroline believes very strongly in the case for specialist schools.
I have two points to make. First, I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Vaizey, about the importance of cathedrals, particularly in church music. My own cathedral, Carlisle Cathedral, set up the school that I went to some time in the seventh century, allegedly with St Cuthbert. It has a very long but fragile tradition, and it needs support. It needs a new partnership between the state and the church in this area of music education.
My second point is that, yes, we need more scholarships at specialist schools, but we also need a broader base of encouraging experts in the arts throughout our education system. This is where changes in the curriculum are so important. Before the election, the Prime Minister said:
“Seriously, in what world does learning to act, dance, sing or paint count less than learning a language from more than a thousand years ago?”
He went on to say:
“We’re going to update the Progress 8 performance measure and use it to help all kids study a creative arts subject or sport until they’re 16”.
Does the Minister believe that the Government are going to deliver on the pledge that Keir Starmer made?
Lord Black of Brentwood (Con)
My Lords, I declare my interest as chair of the Royal College of Music, one of our leading conservatoires, ranked number one in the world QS rankings for performing arts. That we are able to be a global leader in this way, a huge source of soft power for UK plc, is because of the health of our music ecosystem. That ecosystem, the so-called pipeline, is in danger as never before. If it fails then the threat to the future of music in our country is, without exaggeration, existential. It is a delicate organism, depending on many interlocking actions, from primary school teaching right through to the conservatoires and universities where tomorrow’s musicians are trained.
Central to that fragile but vital system are the music and dance scheme schools, the seedbed from which so many of tomorrow’s talented music graduates grow. The future of our conservatoires, in turn, is absolutely predicated on their success. Last year 123 applications for the BMus course at the RSM came from the MDS schools, resulting in 73 offers being made. That is a significant proportion of those coming to study and providing the greatest talents. If the MDS schools failed, with their rigour and training, it would have enormous consequences for all conservatoires. For a tiny amount of money—a rounding error, frankly, for the Treasury—the return is incredible. It is difficult to think of a more important investment in the future of our creative industries, and one on which we should in fact double down.
The future of music in this country hangs in the balance as we wait for action from the Government on so many fronts—on copyright protection, the school curriculum, the future of the Arts Council and the future of the hubs, which exist from hand to mouth because they have no guarantees of funding. I understand that those are all complex issues that can take time, but here we have one that is really simple and which could immediately both help to secure the future of the ecosystem and, at the same time, signal the Government’s commitment to the music. The MDS is a huge success, it is integral to the ecosystem and it pays for itself many times over. Let us show our confidence in it by uplifting its current settlement and restoring three-year grant agreements.
Lord Hall of Birkenhead (CB)
I shall speak in favour of another part of the MDS scheme: the role played by the centres of advanced training, the CATs. These provide specialist training in music or dance for talented 10 to 18 year-olds, while allowing them to stay at home and attend their regular schools. When I chaired the Music and Dance Advisory Board in the noughties, a long time ago, this was a scheme that we all wanted to cherish. What could be better than finding talent wherever it might be, supporting it, nurturing it and giving financial support to those who otherwise would never conceive of having a life in music or dance? That is what these centres—the CATs—do.
However, for that to work, you need long-term commitment. It is difficult to run anything involving people’s lives as this does—young lives—when you are living from year to year not knowing where the money is going to come from. The support that they need to grow is measured over years, not the short-term cycles that we all work on. I also think that commitment should include—and indeed increase—going out there, working in schools and looking for talented children. I myself have seen the inspiration that can come from a dancer or a musician working up close with children in schools.
This morning I had an inspiring chat with an alumnus of a CAT about just that. Reece McMahon grew up in York in a single-parent household on a council estate with no car. For him, it was the Northern School of Contemporary Dance coming into the classroom in his secondary school that lit the spark. As he said to me:
“That visit genuinely opened up the rest of my life”
and
“It gave me confidence”.
That is why CATs cannot be passive, waiting for people to come to them. They have to create those transformative moments and be funded to do so. Reece, by the way, now runs Chisenhale Dance Space. I think he is the youngest dance leader in the UK. He is passionate about giving opportunities to others, opening up doors, however difficult the funding landscape is. As he and I were agreeing, it is not that we lack evidence—we know this works. Over more than two decades it has been finding and producing some really talented people. Let us keep on opening those doors.
Baroness Fraser of Craigmaddie (Con)
My Lords, I stand before you as an alumnus of Tring Park, one of the MDS schools. Dance is, I believe, the “Cinderella” of the arts. The noble Baroness, Lady Bull, talked about the years of training but there is little chance of making money. The UK is blessed: we have world-class ballet companies and schools, but there is a danger that they are filled only with those who can pay and talented foreign dancers.
The Government recognise dancers as critical to economic growth, as they are included in the list of priority professions for visas, but without sustained public funding we will not have homegrown talent—no more Billy Elliots, no more Reese McMahons, no more like the noble Baroness, Lady Bull. Ninette de Valois recognised the need to nurture homegrown talent in 1926 when she created a school before she founded a company.
Professional dance training is expensive. There are audition fees, even for the associate programmes, requirements to travel—sometimes for many hours—around the country to access training hubs, and, even with MDS contributions, fees are more expensive now with VAT. MDS support does not cover exam fees, registration fees, music supplies, physio, insurance, uniform or shoes—and yes, ballet dancers get through a heck of a lot of shoes. This is all before we consider the impact on the rest of the family. You need either really dedicated parents to take you to all these classes, summer schools, intensives and exams, or to be able to afford to board. Neither option can be said to be truly affordable for many families.
Ballet is a global market. We have an incredible British heritage but if there is to be a future for British dancers within our great schools and companies, then truly affordable access to specialist training, through the MDS and CAT schemes, must be maintained for the longer term.
Baroness Keeley (Lab)
My Lords, the music and dance scheme or MDS is a vital gateway for talented children from disadvantaged backgrounds to access world-class training. It is a success story that we must protect to ensure the future pipeline of talented musicians and dancers in the UK.
Schools such as Chetham’s School of Music in Manchester—technically independent but primarily funded through MDS—are in financial distress. Rising costs and the introduction of VAT on fees have compounded issues which were caused because government grants have been frozen or increased below inflation since 2011. Chetham’s actually made efficiencies to manage within budget, and says it would be breaking even this year without the increase in national insurance and the teachers’ pay rise.
At the Hammond School in Chester, students come from Liverpool, Wigan and St Helens but every parent relies on financial support—whether from MDS, dance and drama awards, bursaries or charities. That school absorbed the VAT on fees, as it felt it could not pass it on to families. Now it is operating at a deficit and fears becoming financially unviable within two years. Chetham’s and the Hammond are vital to ensuring specialist training for children in the north of England. These are not typical fee-paying institutions. They are grant-funded centres of excellence in music and dance, serving children whose families cannot afford fees.
I had the privilege on Sunday of speaking to Carlos Acosta, at an event where he was honoured for his outstanding contribution to British theatre. He came from a poor family—as one of 11 children—and received dance training at a state-funded school in Cuba, training that was crucial to his development. Carlos’s vision for Birmingham Royal Ballet centres on the development of future talent. He was therefore disturbed to hear of the financial pressures facing our dance schools. The music and dance scheme is not just a funding mechanism; it is a lifeline. It is the difference between a child from a low-income household accessing world-class training and never discovering their potential at all.
Lord Lingfield (Con)
My Lords, I remind the Committee of my registered interest as chairman of the English Schools’ Orchestra. I pay tribute to my noble friend Lord Blackwell for his long-term championship of the music and dance scheme. The almost one thousand hugely talented students who are supported by the scheme are this country’s soloists, orchestral players and, of course, the corps de ballet of the future. They are among those at the apex of the UK’s cadre of young musicians and it is vital that their funding is not jeopardised. The students are chosen, of course, from a pool of the most musically accomplished children in the country, but, alas, that pool is growing smaller as musical opportunities in state schools diminish.
Many of your Lordships had the good fortune, as I did, to attend schools where music was very much part of daily life. School assemblies, celebration and open days, and parents’ evenings all had musical accompaniment, and of course there were many concerts and other musical entertainments. Alas, this is too often no longer so. There are too many schools where little or no classical music is heard by children, and, where music-making is available, instead of being part of school life it is often off-site at a music hub. Only about 15% of state schools have school orchestras, compared with about 85% of independent schools, so instrumental tuition and playing are too often a solitary activity for the young, with limited chances of taking part with other players in ensembles and orchestras. How wonderful, therefore, that we have the MDS schools, such as Wells Cathedral School and the others, with such high standards of music-making, to which other schools should aspire. It is imperative that they remain as a vital national resource.
Lord Freyberg (CB)
My Lords, Britain’s reputation as a global creative powerhouse rests on the strength of its education system, yet while other nations expand investment in creative learning, we appear to be retreating from it. The recent decision to remove bursaries for music and art teachers, at a time when recruitment for secondary music trainees meets barely 40% of the Government’s own target, illustrates starkly this contradiction.
The Department for Education claims that music teacher recruitment has risen by 53%, which is very welcome, but this represents recovery from an exceptionally low base and not success. Meanwhile, 42% of state schools had no students entered for GCSE music in 2022-23, up from 28% in 2016. Against this backdrop, the removal of support for training new teachers seems a puzzling way to rebuild capacity. As the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, said, the disconnect between rhetoric and reality undermines confidence. Ministers speak of restoring creative education, yet their departments steadily dismantle the infrastructure needed to deliver it. It is as though the ghost of former Minister Nick Gibb still haunts the department’s corridors, his philosophy lingering in policies that reward STEM while quietly trimming the arts.
I ask the Minister who in the department is driving these decisions. How do they align with the Government’s stated commitment to creative education? The music and dance scheme embodies what is at stake—eight specialist schools nurturing 940 gifted young people, many from low-income families—yet its funding has been frozen since 2011, losing a third of its value in real terms. A modest £4 million uplift and multiyear funding would secure these pathways and show that the Government’s cultural ambitions are more than words.
Baroness Ramsey of Wall Heath (Lab)
My Lords, according to research by the Sutton Trust, 43% of classical musicians went to private school, compared with 7% of the population as a whole. More than half of all students at the Royal College of Music and the Royal Academy of Music did so. Since you are 10 times more likely to go to private school if your parents are in the top 10% of earners, rather than average earners, it is obvious that many young people are being denied the opportunity to shine in the creative industries simply because they were not born into a wealthy family. That is unfair to them and, of course, to all of us. How many amazing performances are audiences missing out on because stars in the making had to drop out through lack of funding?
Taxpayers lose out too. Some £11 billion a year is an already amazing economic contribution from music and the performing and visual arts, but just imagine how much more it could be if talented youngsters were not being turned away through lack of funds. The fact is that specialist music and dance training is expensive, which is why government help for those who would really benefit if they could only afford it is so important.
I should perhaps declare a maternal interest at this point: I have a daughter at the BRIT School, the first and leading state school for performing and creative arts in the UK, with Adele and Tom Holland among its alumni. The BRIT School is a model of diversity, with nearly half of students coming from lower-income families. To be clear, it is not part of the music and dance scheme, which is why I declared a maternal rather than a financial interest. The Committee will not be surprised to hear that, having had the opportunity to see for myself the power of top-quality specialist creative education, I am grateful that the noble Lord, Lord Blackwell, secured this debate on the importance of affordable specialist music and dance schools.
I anticipate support across the Committee, not least given the welcome Labour manifesto commitment that
“the arts and music will no longer be the preserve of a privileged few”,
followed by the Government’s recently published plan to significantly increase direct funding for the creative industries sector. Confirming the future of the music and dance scheme would be an excellent contribution to this plan, providing the opportunity for more talented youngsters without wealthy parents to attend the very best specialist schools and colleges.
Lord Kirkham (Con)
My Lords, the Government’s clear manifesto commitment was that
“the arts and music will no longer be the preserve of a privileged few”.
Nothing is more crucial to the fulfilment of this pledge than ensuring continued access to our world-class specialist music and dance schools on the basis of talent, not parental wealth, yet here we are, starving these national treasures of resources and giving them no certainty on future funding.
The principal of the Purcell School, the oldest specialist music school, puts a precise number on the shortfall in the MDS scheme this year: £4 million. Coincidentally, that is the sum that the Government have added to MDS funding to compensate lower-income parents for the VAT added to their fees. How simple it would be to bring joy to our specialist music and dance schools, and to secure their futures, by allowing them to retain that money, rather than having it recycled back into the Treasury.
The other fundamental that our specialist schools need is certainty. The Government must revert to the historic norm of funding the MDS on a three-year basis, allowing schools to plan their budgets and resources. If they do not do this, the Purcell School believes that the majority of MDS schools will be forced to close down within the next two years.
If we want to ensure the future of our world-class orchestras, dance companies, theatres and rock bands, we must cherish the fantastic resources in our specialist schools, particularly if we wish to ensure the continued diversity of players and performers and provide a career path for the gifted, regardless of family financial status. Surely this must be exactly what the present Government desire. If they will the end, they must provide the means.
Lord Addington (LD)
My Lords, from listening to this debate it is quite clear that one theme has come through: please give us certainty. With a one-year scheme, nobody would encourage a child to go into this. In dance, you are more certain to break your leg than you are in professional rugby—okay, maybe it is an even draw. You are asking a child to go into something risky, with no guarantees, so at least let them finish their training with a degree of certainty. I have to disagree: three years is not long enough. It should go on through their entire training. There has to be certainty.
If the Government do not like the MDS, they should change it and bring in something else that guarantees opportunity. That is something that is coming out here today. The economic case has been made—here and on many occasions—that you get a very good bang for your buck if you produce good artists.
I could not agree more with the noble Baroness, Lady Warwick. We need to make sure that we have an identification process for getting people into this, by encouraging the schools to at least have an introduction that might allow children to go on to this. You will cut out many people from the state school sector if you do not have some familiarisation package that means that they are ready for specialist training. The two go together, and there has to be an ongoing commitment to ensure that they are both working together.
If the Government do not like the MDS or the CAT scheme, they should come up with something new. If they do like them, they should guarantee them for as long as the Labour Party is in power. That is not too much to ask, and the economic benefits are clear.
The Earl of Effingham (Con)
My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Blackwell and all noble Lords for their valuable contributions, which are clearly united in their support. Access to high-level music and dance training should be an opportunity for every individual with shining talent. The music and dancing scheme exists to ensure that talent, wherever it is found, has a route to success. For over 2,000 students from low-income backgrounds, it has been exactly that—a lifeline, as was so well put by the noble Baroness, Lady Keeley.
That lifeline, however, is now under threat. There are serious and growing concerns about the future of the music and dance scheme. The Government have yet to confirm whether the scheme will continue beyond the current academic year, leaving students, parents and the schools themselves in a state of prolonged uncertainty.
In the spring, we were told that a decision on the scheme’s future would follow the conclusion of the spending review. That review has now passed but there is still no announcement on funding. No one likes uncertainty but the Government are helping to create uncertainty for families, schools and those very children with the talent and ability to achieve their dreams of performing at the highest levels. Surely, they deserve better than vague timelines and delayed decisions.
One had only to look at the front page of a major newspaper yesterday to see that the Government are spending £260 million on centres for deportation, which provide illegal migrants with “art classes”, including skills such as “sketching, crafts and … painting”. Can the Minister explain how, on the one hand, the Government seriously continue to provide arts funding of this nature but, on the other, will not commit to just £36 million per year for the music and dance scheme? The noble Lord, Lord Black, is entirely correct: it is a rounding error. The noble Lord, Lord Vaizey, is spot on: it is a pinprick in a Treasury spreadsheet. His Majesty’s loyal Opposition urge the Government to end this uncertainty and publicly commit to the continuation and stability of the music and dance scheme. Surely our future young musicians of the year and dancers are worth it.
Baroness in Waiting/Government Whip (Baroness Blake of Leeds) (Lab)
My Lords, I start with an enormous thank you to the noble Lord, Lord Blackwell, for bringing forward this important debate. The number of people taking part demonstrates the strength of feeling in this House and, clearly, beyond. I thank all noble Lords who have spoken, who have considerable experience in this area. It is always an enormous privilege to hear them.
I mentioned before my personal interest from my role as the leader of Leeds City Council, when I took on its cultural portfolio. Like the noble Baroness, Lady Fraser, who talked about ballet shoes, and my noble friend Lady Ramsey, who spoke of her personal experience, I have personal experience from a granddaughter who is very involved in this area, and thank goodness—it is wonderful to see, as we have heard from all who contributed.
I make clear from the outset that access to specialist music and dance education must not be the preserve of the privileged few. This is the Government’s clear view. In emphasising the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, we have to stress this throughout, despite the difficult times through which we are living. As part of our opportunity mission, we want to widen access to the arts, so that young people can develop their creativity and find their expression and voice. This is important in its own right—subjects such as music and dance are a critical part of a rich education—but it also supports young people with the dedication to excel in the performing arts.
In closing this debate, I underline this Government’s commitment to maintaining affordable access to specialist music and dance education so that, regardless of their background, high-achieving young people can access specialist training. As we have heard through the debate, the Government continue to provide generous support to help students access specialist music and dance education and training. We committed £36.5 million to the music and dance scheme this academic year, as we have heard.
I will pick up on the comments of the noble Baroness, Lady Bottomley, and the noble Lord, Lord Addington, about the contribution that the sector makes to the richness of our economy. We know that growth is the Government’s number one mission and that the new industrial strategy is central to that. This is a sector in which the UK excels today and will propel us forward tomorrow.
The creative industries have been announced as one of the eight growth-driving sectors in the industrial strategy, which has been published following the multi-year spending review. The creative industries sector plan has been designed in collaboration with business and devolved Governments and the regions. It is critical that we provide a workforce with the right skills and capabilities, as we will go on to discuss. I am looking forward very much to the Government’s work on skills and where this sits within it.
I emphasise that the scheme provides income-assessed bursaries and grants to enable high-achieving children and young people in music and dance to benefit from world-class specialist training, regardless of their personal and financial circumstances. The scheme supports students to attend eight independent schools and 20 centres for advanced training, the latter providing places at weekends and evenings and in the school holidays. Bursaries support more than 2,000 pupils a year, with around 900 pupils attending schools. I emphasise that all families earning below the average relevant income of £45,000 per annum and making parental contributions will continue to receive additional financial support this academic year, so they will be unaffected financially by the VAT change in January 2025.
The music and dance scheme is a long-term commitment and the Government will continue to look at it. We know that there is enormous gratitude for the additional £4 million covering the issue of VAT. I want to give reassurance that due consideration will be given to the cost of providing specialist education, including consideration of the points made today by the noble Baroness, Lady Bull, my noble friend Lady Royall, and the noble Lords, Lord Vaizey, Lord Black and Lord Hall. They all made important points about long-term funding, and the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, emphasised them.
I have to say, however, that we have been, in the main, in this space for more than two decades. This is not something new that has been brought in. The current scheme was established in, I think, 2002 under the previous Labour Government. We need to be clear about where we are going forward. We know that we have had to make tough decisions to get our finances back under control—the noble Lord, Lord Hall, referred to this—including some additional non-bursary funding and some music and dance scheme centres. The main bursary funding itself has, however, been protected. All eligible students from the last academic year have continued to receive MDS bursaries, and new eligible students will have commenced at the beginning of this term.
The Government will also ensure that high-quality arts education, including in music and dance, is available across all state-funded schools. To achieve this, additional support for our schools and teachers is needed. We acknowledge this. I want to pick up on the comments of my noble friend Lady Warwick on the impact of EBacc and recognising the need for pupils to be prepared and ready for training as the noble Lord, Lord Addington said. We want every child, regardless of background, to have a rich, broad, inclusive and innovative curriculum.
I am sure all noble Lords will be aware that we are still awaiting the launch of the independent review of curriculum assessment, chaired by Professor Becky Francis. She is looking at all subjects. She is looking at music and seeks to deliver a curriculum that readies young people for life and work, including in creative subjects and skills. It is being informed by evidence and data, and in close consultation with education professionals and other experts. Parents, children, young people and other stakeholders, such as employers, have been involved in that work.
The final report is very close to being published but I cannot pre-empt the outcome of that review, as I am sure noble Lords will be aware, despite requests for me to do so. We will of course consider associated implications for accountability measures, such as EBacc and Progress 8, alongside this. It is fundamental that we take this incredibly seriously. I hope noble Lords understand that the Government are emphasising these points, as my noble friend Lord Liddle highlighted.
On additional support, again, that is why we announced in March our intention to launch the new National Centre for Arts and Music Education as we go forward. We believe that the new centre will help us to meet our ambitions for improved and equitable arts education. The centre will support schools in teaching music and dance, as well as art and design and drama. It will also be the national delivery partner for the music hubs network, with the 43 hub partnerships central to supporting schools. Our intention is to appoint a delivery partner for the centre through an open, competitive procurement. We have been engaging with sector stakeholders, including the music hubs network, to refine the details of the centre. The invitation to tender is due to be issued soon.
Again, in recognising how important this is, the music hubs grant funding of £76 million has been secured for the full academic year of 2025-26 and to the end of August 2026. Following the outcome of the spending review, longer-term funding will be confirmed in due course. The Government continue to invest £25 million in capital funding to widen access to musical instruments and technology to the end of this year.
I am taking a bit of licence here in what I pick up, with the permission of the Whip, because we have until 3 pm.
Baroness Bull (CB)
Can the Minister help me to understand where dance will sit within the new centre that she describes? The centre is dedicated to music and the arts but, as we know, in schools dance sits within the PE curriculum. Is there going to be some sort of tension in how the centre can support dance within schools, when in fact it is not viewed as an art but as a physical education subject?
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
I have had the great pleasure of having this discussion with the noble Baroness on a number of occasions. I cannot go further than we have before on the curriculum review, but there is an acknowledgement of the position of dance and its relationship to PE. In all of the wider picture, that voice is very loud and it has been heard.
I want to emphasise the issue of teacher training, on which an important point has been raised. It is true that the £10,000 tax-free bursary for music will be removed in 2026-27 but this is due to improved teacher retention and higher ITT recruitment. That is the basis for that announcement on 11 October. I also emphasise the importance of choir schools, referred to by my noble friend Lord Liddle. As part of the scheme, the department provides a grant of £210,000 to the Choir Schools Association. This offers means-tested support to choristers attending CSA member schools, including cathedral and collegiate choir schools in England, to help those with exceptional talent who are unable to afford the fees.
This has been a rich debate and I am conscious that I have not been able to give all the points that have been made their due notice. I know that we will have more discussion across the House but we are at a critical point, as the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, mentioned, given the timing of the Budget that is coming up. I understand why so many noble Lords have brought these matters to the attention of the House through this important debate.
In closing, I underline this Government’s commitment to ensuring that all children can access and engage with high-quality music and dance education. Access to the arts is a vital part of a rich education and must not be the preserve of the privileged few.
The Earl of Clancarty (CB)
Before the Minister sits down, since we have a couple of minutes, I have a point of clarification. The figure of £4 million has been repeated a number of times in the debate. I would clarify for people watching that the £4 million the Government have given is to offset VAT, but the music and dance schools are asking for an entirely separate £4 million. I just wanted to put that on record.
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab)
Thank you. I acknowledge that and we will obviously take away some of the more detailed comments made. I have just had a note to tell me that the new PE and sport partnerships will support dance as well as sport in schools, if that is helpful.