Education Secretary Lord Andrew Adonis was a guest of Hilary Armstrong MP in her North-Durham consituency at the weekend for a private meeting on education reforms with Labour Party members and headteachers, The Northern Echo's deputy editor, Chris Lloyd questioned him about the fallout in Darlington over the breakdown of the merger between Hurworth and Eastbourne schools.

CHRIS LLOYD: Eastbourne is to press ahead with a new 650-place academy. Aren't City Academies designed to be big schools in deprived inner city areas?

LORD ADONIS: They are just called academies now. When we started the programme, it was focused on cities, but we have diversified.

Now a good proportion of the proposals for academies that the Government receives are for small academies in rural areas or smaller towns.

It isn't about whether it is a city, but about whether the educational standards are low and the community has high deprivation indices.

And there's no set size. Most academies are large because they replaced large schools, but they are about responding to local needs. We have yet to make a specific decision about Eastbourne, but it does qualify for an academy.

CHRIS LLOYD: Darlington council was told it wouldn't get Building Schools for the Future (BSF) money until 2011, but there would be money available for rebuilding almost immediately if it opted for an academy. Why?

LORD ADONIS: BSF is phased over 15 years because even though we are spending big amounts, we can't do it all in one go.

But in the case of academies, they are funded from a separate budget and programme, so get investment earlier. However, a school that becomes an academy now will not get BSF investment later.

The issue for the council and community is whether an academy would offer better standards and opportunities.

An academy has a mission and a set of sponsors behind it that is focused on school improvements and enhanced opportunities -that's what's happening at other academies.

It is a fresh start for the school because the sponsors come in.

CHRIS LLOYD: The Church of England was to sponsor the proposed Hurworth-Eastbourne academy to the tune of £2m, and is likely to retain its interest in a solo Eastbourne academy.

There were raised eyebrows locally when the CoE said its money would come from a handful of unnamed private donors.

Surely, as with the funding of political parties, there should be transparency over the funding of schools and the selecting of school governors?

LORD ADONIS: It is an issue for the CoE and we are assuming that the resources are bona fide. I've never had a difficulty with the church. But it is a legitimate issue for the community. It is one people will need to ask the CoE itself.

We would expect the church to be clear how it is funding it.

CHRIS LLOYD: While Eastbourne goes solo down the academy route, Hurworth is to become a foundation school and may ask for trust status. What is the difference between the two?

LORD ADONIS: The legal basis of a foundation and a trust school is the same. They own their own land, employ their own staff, but are both state schools in terms of funding.

Foundation schools are part of the BSF programme, which is a three-way partnership between the Government, the local council and the school.

Capital funding for an academy is directly supplied by the Government.

The difference between foundation and trust is the relationship with the sponsor - usually a church, business or university. In the case of the trust school, it is a formal relationship with the sponsor having a proportion of the governing board.

CHRIS LLOYD: Doesn't the Darlington experience show that, rather than having a loose collection of largely autonomous schools, there needs to be some strong local strategic control?

LORD ADONIS: Academies are only autonomous in their governance.

They only become academies with local authority support, but that doesn't mean the local authority role ends.

It doesn't mean there's no process of local co-ordination; the local council will play that role, particularly in terms of admissions.