THIS HAS BEEN UPDATED ON 19 FEBRUARY 1996
THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
OFFICIAL REPORT
IN THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT OF THE
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
[WHICH OPENED 27 APRIL 1992]
FORTY-FIFTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF
HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II
SIXTH SERIES
VOLUME 272
SIXTH VOLUME OF SESSION 1995-96
House of Commons
Monday 19 February 1996
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
WALES
Breast Cancer
1. Mrs. Clwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what recent assessment he has made of the mortality incidence of breast cancer in Wales relative to the rest of the United Kingdom.[14156]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Rod Richards): Mortality from breast cancer in Wales is higher than in other parts of the United Kingdom, which may be partly a reflection of the higher incidence of the disease in Wales. Overall mortality from breast cancer in Wales fell by nearly 10 per cent. between 1988 and 1994, a rate of decline slightly greater than the UK average.
Mrs. Clwyd: Why are lower targets being set in Wales than in England for a reduction in the incidence of mortality? Why are Welsh women expected to take second best? Before the Minister answers, since Scott has demonstrated that the Conservative party is in the
business of giving misleading and inaccurate answers, can he tell us whether he is telling the whole truth, part of the truth or his version of the truth?
Mr. Richards: The hon. Lady has not lost her talent for being offensive. In Wales, the target is to reduce the breast cancer death rate in the screened age group--the group aged 50 to 64--by at least 25 per cent. by 2000. Ladies in Wales are not regarded as second best to ladies in England.
Revenue Support Grant
2. Mr. Martyn Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many representations he has had from local authorities in Wales concerning the level of revenue support grant proposed for the new unitary authorities.[14157]
The Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. William Hague): Several. My proposals for the 1996-97 local government revenue settlement were approved by the House on 8 February.
Mr. Jones: Is the Secretary of State aware that the figures of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy show that the Clwyd county council area has lost roughly 400 teachers in the past three years and that, in that time, the number of pupils has increased by 700? That must mean larger class sizes. The level of revenue support grant means that the new unitary authorities in Clwyd are expected to fund teachers' pay by efficiency savings. That has to mean another cut and fewer teachers. What does the Secretary of State want to say to parents of my area, whose children will be taught in even bigger classes from April?
Mr. Hague: Central Government support for local government spending is £864 per head in Wales, which is £132 per head higher than in England. When local authorities complain about that settlement, council tax
payers and parents should ask themselves, "Is every penny spent by the council spent wisely?" and, "Are all the things that local government spends money on necessary?" It is the right settlement and a generous one. It was approved by the House by a majority of 72 votes on 8 February and the hon. Gentleman did not even vote against it.
Mr. Nigel Evans: Does my right hon. Friend agree that, if the Opposition think that the revenue support grant is insufficient, the onus is on them to say how much it ought to be and where they would get the money from?
Mr. Hague: Yes. There has been a notable silence from the Opposition Front Bench on that subject. They have been unable to say whether they think that the local government settlement should be higher, lower, a bit higher or a lot higher and they refused to say so throughout our debate on the subject two weeks ago. It is time that they came clean about their policy, instead of pretending to the voters that they would spend more but wanting to say in the House that they would not spend more at all.
Mr. Alex Carlile: When considering the representations, how will the Secretary of State deal with the shortfall of more than £500,000 in the education budget in Powys caused by the decision of 200 to 300 16-year-olds to return to school rather than go to the local further education college? Will he ensure that the money that would have followed them to the college follows them back to their schools, so that they really have a choice about where to be educated?
Mr. Hague: I do not think that it is possible to adjust budgets for local government and for the Further Education Funding Council on the basis of decisions made in each area. It is up to local authorities to manage the resources that are available to them, to use them as efficiently as possible and to serve the interests of their local residents as best as they can.
Dr. Spink: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that council tax levels in Wales are 40 per cent. lower than they are in England, which represents a very good deal for the people of Wales? Notwithstanding that fact, does he agree that education in Wales is in good heart and in good condition, which we should welcome, and that we should be congratulating teachers in Wales rather than decrying their efforts?
Mr. Hague: My hon. Friend is right that council tax levels in Wales are substantially lower than those in England. As he said, in recent years there have been marked improvements in education in Wales, as last week's report of our chief inspector of schools demonstrated. There is further work to be done, and the Government have a wide-ranging programme of initiatives to continue to raise standards in education in the coming years.
Mr. Win Griffiths: Will the Secretary of State confirm that his own parliamentary answers show that revenue support grant has been reduced as a proportion of local government spending? Will he further confirm--again from statistics issued by his office--that local education
authorities have reduced their administrative costs, despite which class sizes have increased, and that, under this year's settlement, central Government support for local government will reduce, as a result of which most local authorities in Wales expect to make cuts of approximately 3 per cent. in their education budgets, let alone in any of their other budgets? Why will not the Secretary of State do something positive to provide the resources to help teachers and local authorities, who are doing a good job against all the odds--and in spite of the Government?
Mr. Hague: The figures show that, in the current year, the Government will provide 88.6 per cent. of local government total standard spending whereas in the coming year they will provide 87.8 per cent., which is a change of 0.8 per cent. If the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues object to that, it is incumbent on them to say what they think the percentage should be. I hand it to the hon. Gentleman because, in the debate 11 days ago, when the Under-Secretary of State for Wales, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North (Mr. Jones), asked him whether he would spend more on education, alone among Labour Front Benchers, he said, "Yes." We now wait to hear from him how much that amount would be.
European Currency
3. Mr. Jon Owen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment his Department has made of the effect a single European currency will have on the Welsh economy.[14158]
Mr. Jones: That is the most astonishing answer. The Secretary of State for Wales has made no assessment whatsoever of the largest potential economic change that we can recall being predicted in recent times, which may occur no more than three years from now. The Secretary of State, with all his resources in the Welsh Office, has made no assessment. Is that because he has no interest in Wales, or is it because he wants to ensure that there is no extra room for argument on the Conservative Benches on that most vital issue?
Mr. Hague: It is because this country has a choice about a single currency, thanks to the opt-out negotiated at Maastricht by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. We will exercise that choice if or when the occasion arises. Any assessment of the benefits or otherwise would have to take into account the particular interests of Wales. As the United Kingdom has one currency, any decision would have to be based on the interests of the United Kingdom as a whole.
Sir Wyn Roberts: Is not it a remarkable tribute to the economic management of this country that it is one of the few that could meet the convergence criteria? Our unemployment is falling, whereas it is increasing in other countries as they try to meet those criteria. Is not it clear that Conservative Members are safe on Europe, and that uncertainty results from the readiness of Opposition Members to sign anything that comes out of Brussels?
Mr. Hague: My right hon. Friend is absolutely right.I sometimes get the impression that Opposition Members would sign any piece of paper that floated across the English channel. He is also right to say that we now face extraordinarily good economic circumstances--the best economic circumstances and prospects that we have had for a generation. Unemployment in Wales fell again last week--it did so by more than 1,000--and that record will continue as long as the Government are in office to pursue the policies that have achieved it.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |