| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cirencester and Tewkesbury): Does my right hon. Friend recall that last
year the Liberal-dominated Gloucestershire county council cut individual school budgets by between 4 and 7 per cent. Will he confirm that this year's figures will allow that council to set a council tax, if it wishes to, which will provide for a generous 5.3 per cent. increase in funding for education? Would not every parent, governor and teacher be able to regard it as a scandal if the county council did not substantially increase individual school budgets?
Mr. Gummer: It will be a scandal if school budgets do not increase in that way in Gloucestershire. It will not be a surprise, however, if that does not happen. Liberals in Gloucestershire have shown themselves willing to play party politics with children's education. They have done it in Gloucestershire and elsewhere. I know of nothing in the past that has been like that. I am sorry that the Liberals should have lowered themselves to that level.
Mr. Richard Tracey (Surbiton): I thank my right hon. Friend for the care that he has given to education in Kingston upon Thames. I reassure him that I will support any measure which ensures that the £1.25 million extra spending for schools in Kingston goes to schools and is not milked off by the local authority.
On a separate issue, will my right hon. Friend use the greatest caution in relation to the area cost adjustment as it affects London? Although my right hon. Friend represents a constituency elsewhere, he lives in London, so he will know that London is more expensive simply because of the number of tourists, the greater use of the roads, the increased use of the city because of the railway stations and the airports, and the increased cost of care for the elderly.
Mr. Gummer:
As a Minister, I live in London during the week, but at the weekends and when Parliament is not sitting, I live in the country, so I am entirely independent on the matter. I can see both sides of the case, which have been adequately presented in the House. That is why I have decided that there should be an independent inquiry, which will no doubt look carefully at the points raised by my hon. Friend. However, it will also have to consider my county's concerns regarding sparsity, distance and the difficulty of paying for small schools which are necessary if adequate and proper education is to be provided for small communities. I cannot say that the argument is all on one side. That is why the argument is so difficult to get straight and that is why we have asked for an independent inquiry.
Mr. Ian Bruce (South Dorset):
My right hon. Friend will know that the Minister of State, Home Office, my right hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Maclean), has sent round a letter putting in layman's terms what the increases could mean to police authorities--for example, 66 additional officers for Dorset and a total increase of 6.2 per cent. Will my right hon.
Friend ensure that his other ministerial colleagues do something similar, particularly with regard to education?
Last year, when it came to ensuring that schools were adequately staffed, Dorset county council said that it was £5 million short, yet we have now discovered from the auditor that the county filched £10 million that it did not need to spend.
Mr. Gummer:
My hon. Friend points to the generality. One could understand that being accidental if it occurred in one council, but when it occurs in almost every Labour or Labour-Liberal-controlled council, one has to recognise that there is a concerted effort, which goes as follows. People are frightened by the prospect of a cut which will not come; the council gets an increase but says that there has been a cut, and then the money is put into something else. In my county, money for schools has been put into road signs and red lines across roads. I hope that this time the county will ensure that every penny goes to the schools.
Mr. Jacques Arnold (Gravesham):
People in Kent will be delighted to know that the Government are putting an additional 4 per cent. of funding into the county and into its schools. They will also be more than a little relieved because they were led to believe by a document produced with council tax payers' money that there would be no additional money for inflation or pay awards. Bearing in mind the fact that the schools were short-changed last year, what are the prospects for that money finding its way to the Kent schools?
Mr. Gummer:
There is no doubt that Kent schools will be able to cover reasonably expected increases in expenditure and probably something rather better than that. But if Kent county council was more concerned about its priorities and spent its money in the schools, it could do even better. But I fear that we may have to wait for Kent county council to cease to be run by the alliance and return to sensible Conservative control.
Mr. Dobson:
Rather than have a rant, which is the Secretary of State's usual response to questions from Opposition Members, will he simply confirm that none of the figures quoted by Conservative Members with regard to funds for education makes any allowance for the 86,000 increase in the number of school pupils, the expected pay increases, the expected level of inflation or the additional legal duties which the House has placed on local education authorities?
Mr. Gummer:
Some of the money that has been given to the local authorities and some of their added spending will obviously have to cover their additions during the coming year, which is what always happens. But if this is an inadequate settlement, the hon. Gentleman might like the opportunity to say publicly how much would be an adequate settlement, and from where the money would come. The hon. Gentleman is incredible in the House.
The Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. William Hague):
With permission, Madam Speaker, I should like to make a statement about the future proceedings of the Welsh Grand Committee. I have a number of proposals to make, which I hope will ensure that Welsh concerns are debated effectively in the House and which will bring the business of Parliament more effectively to Wales. With that in mind, I am proposing to seek to amend Standing Orders so as to extend and enhance the role of the Welsh Grand Committee.
The Welsh Grand Committee has for many years provided the House with a mechanism by which Members can give detailed consideration to matters relating exclusively to Wales. It is a mechanism which, in recent Sessions, has been relatively little used. In the past three years, there have been only eight meetings of the Committee, even though they have generally been held whenever requested.
I wish to change that disappointing picture. The Welsh Grand Committee has the potential to bring the business of the House to the attention of the people of Wales, and provide a more useful forum for discussion than at present.
First, I wish to introduce Question Time proceedings to the Committee. Interest in Welsh questions is considerable. On every occasion, there are many questions that cannot be reached, and I want to extend the opportunities for oral questions, to the Welsh Grand Committee.
I am therefore proposing that the Committee's Standing Orders should provide for an additional Question Time at some meetings, on dates to be specified in advance with the agreement of the House.
The normal arrangements for giving notice of questions would apply. Each member of the Committee would be able to table one question for answer on a specified day, and 10 sitting days' notice would be required. Questions will be taken at the beginning of sittings of the Committee, and could last for up to 30 minutes. Replies to questions not reached would be printed in the Official Report.
I hope that Members on both sides of the House will welcome this additional opportunity to put questions directly to me and my colleagues about the conduct of the Government's business in Wales, and appreciate that that will significantly increase their ability to raise issues of immediate concern.
I would like the Committee to be able to consider issues of current topical concern in more depth than is possible at present on the Floor of the House. I am therefore also proposing that the Committee will be able to hold short debates to allow more detailed consideration of a smaller number of specific questions.
Each member of the Committee will be able to give notice of a subject to be raised in a short debate on a specified day, with 10 days' sitting notice required. Proceedings on short debates will be allowed to continue for 30 minutes, which should be sufficient time to allow two or three subjects to be raised on each occasion.
In addition, and because I am aware that Members may from time to time wish to raise matters of particular concern to their constituents, I am proposing that in future
the Welsh Grand Committee should be able to hold Adjournment debates on matters raised by Members, at the end of the Committee's normal business.
I am also proposing that in future any Minister in the House, whether or not he or she is a Minister for Wales, may take part in debates in the Welsh Grand Committee, enabling them to participate fully in discussion of matters relating to their United Kingdom responsibilities. Any Minister, whether or not he or she is a Member of the House, would also be able to make a statement and to answer questions arising from that statement.
That would represent a very significant and beneficial change in the Committee's procedures. It would enable Members representing constituencies in Wales to listen to and question a Minister with UK or Great Britain responsibilities that affect Wales. It will give the Welsh Grand Committee the scope to examine all aspects of Government policies affecting Wales, and not only on matters that are the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Wales. It will give Welsh Members a further opportunity to debate Welsh affairs while benefiting from their role in a United Kingdom Parliament.
I am pleased to be able to tell the House that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer have both said that they will be prepared to attend a meeting of the Committee if the amendments to Standing Orders are approved by the House.
All those changes will, of course, be in addition to the Committee's existing provisions, and the emphasis will still be on broad-ranging debates on issues of general concern about policy in Wales. Wales does not have a separate legal framework and I am therefore not proposing an additional legislative role for the Committee. I propose that there should be a minimum of four meetings of the Committee each year and that they should be timetabled in advance, allowing notice for the tabling of questions and subjects for short debates. In addition, I would expect it to meet on at least a further two or three occasions, as business permits and issues arise.
To date, two meetings of the Welsh Grand Committee have been held in Cardiff. I want to see it meet more frequently in Wales, and not just in the capital city. It is important to give people in other towns and cities the opportunity to witness the Committee's debates and thus to recognise that the business of the House and of the Committee is intimately concerned with the impact of Government policy on people in all parts of Wales. I appreciate that meetings outside the House place special demands on the House authorities, and officials at the Welsh Office will be ready to offer whatever assistance may be needed in establishing meetings of the Committee in suitable venues across Wales. I would envisage half the timetabled sessions of the Committee taking place in Wales each year, and up to half the additional meetings.
The new Standing Orders will be brought forward for approval shortly. Should the House agree them, I would expect soon thereafter to table a motion setting out a timetable for the rest of this Session.
4.44 pm
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |