| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Higher Education Funding
12. Mrs. Anne Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what is the percentage change in planned capital and recurrent funding for higher education between 1995-96 and 1996-97. [14687]
Mr. Forth: Planned capital and recurrent funding for higher education institutions in England will be £4.6 billion in 1996-97, a reduction of 2 per cent. in cash terms from 1995-96.
Universities and colleges are being encouraged to use private finance to fund capital expenditure so as to maximise the value of taxpayers' money.
Mrs. Campbell:
Is the Minister unaware that slashing the capital budget by 30 per cent. next year and by almost 50 per cent. over the next three years will have the most disastrous effect on universities' ability to provide for their students? Further, is he unaware that capital funds are used for the purchase and maintenance of equipment for teaching and research, which is totally unsuited to provision by the private finance initiative?
Mr. Forth:
I am aware that we are asking higher education institutions to explore every possibility for the imaginative use of private finance in place of a complete reliance on the public purse and the Government of the day. That is a healthy development.
As I said in reply to an earlier question, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I are in close contact with the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals,
the Higher Education Funding Council for England and others to assess the impact of the switch to private finance on different institutions and types of education resource. The impact will differ for each organisation and resource. We will consider the way forward in the light of that assessment. Much work is being done in close conjunction with higher education.
Mr. Jenkin:
Will my hon. Friend ask Sir Ron Dearing to prepare two reports after his inquiry into higher education? The first, for the Conservative Government, could highlight policies that would bring about choice, excellence, private funding and independence for our universities; the second could contain a rag-bag of tired ideas for the Labour party to use in its manifesto, which will be redundant after the next general election.
Mr. Forth:
Tempted though I am by my hon. Friend's seductive suggestion, I would not dream of asking Sir Ron Dearing to waste his time doing anything of the kind. Sir Ron need prepare only one report, because only we will be in government after the next election.
Mr. Bryan Davies:
The Minister's answers on higher education today have been all sound and no bite. Will he explain how the cuts that are being made in the capital budget--which, as my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Mrs. Campbell) said a moment ago, affect equipment also--can possibly be bridged by the private finance initiative, given that institutions are already telling him and the Secretary of State that, at the most, they will be able to get 10 per cent. support for certain capital projects and that the PFI is entirely unsuited to equipment?
Mr. Forth:
I do not know whether that is an implied spending commitment by the hon. Gentleman on behalf of his party. I do not know, either, whether he has the permission of the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) to make it. We are aware, of course, that there will be different requirements in different higher education institutions, that different solutions will have to be brought forward and that an imaginative and positive approach will be required by all. As I have said twice already, I think--but I shall repeat myself for the hon. Gentleman's benefit--we are working closely with all concerned to ensure that the switch to private finance, instead of total reliance on the public purse, is successful. As for the hon. Gentleman's accusation that I was unable to produce a soundbite, I regard that as a badge of honour.
13. Ms Quin:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment when she next expects to meet her EU counterpart to discuss working conditions. [14688]
Mr. Forth:
I expect to meet European Union Employment Ministers at the next meeting of the Social Affairs Council on 29 March. On such occasions, I emphasise to them the importance of taking action to help member states tackle unemployment, rather than working up new and burdensome employment law directives which would damage competitiveness and destroy jobs.
Ms Quin:
Will the Minister take time to explain to his European Union counterparts and to the House why so
Mr. Forth:
The hon. Lady misses the point. We resisted the blanket imposition of one uniform solution in the private sector throughout the EU. I am relaxed if companies decide to follow a certain course, including the setting up of works councils. That is a matter for companies to decide, and I welcome that. We shall continue to resist the blind desire of some people to impose the same solution on every member state of the EU regardless of its needs. That is the road to ruin.
Sir Donald Thompson:
When my hon. Friend visits my constituency again, he will find that working conditions and the amount of work are such that it has one of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe--5 per cent. Will he talk to employers, first, about the reluctance of ladies in my constituency to work full time--they prefer working part time--and, secondly, about more flexible training for people going into manufacturing industry?
Mr. Forth:
It is refreshing to hear someone talk with pride about what is being achieved in his constituency. My hon. Friend reflects the sense of pride and achievement that Conservative Members have in their local communities and in what they are achieving. It is not the terrible, abysmal doom and gloom peddled constantly by Opposition Members, who obviously have no confidence in their local communities or in the country.
Mr. MacShane:
Is the Minister aware that, in my constituency, in which I take pride and in which tremendous efforts are being made to regenerate the local economy, a job was recently advertised by the jobcentre at £1.44 an hour? Could the Minister live on that?
Mr. Forth:
People are free in a flexible labour market to examine the possibilities. Employers are free to suggest their pay rates and individuals are free to make a judgment about what is an appropriate pay rate. I hope that the hon. Gentleman is not suggesting or implying that we should introduce a statutory minimum wage of the sort that has helped to create a 23 per cent. unemployment rate in Spain, for example.
14. Mr. David Evans:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what plans she has to make it easier for schools and their governing bodies to dismiss bad teachers. [14689]
Mr. Robin Squire:
Schools already have the necessary means to dismiss bad teachers.
Mr. Evans:
I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. Does he agree that most teachers are excellent? Is he aware, however, that the results of a recent survey revealed that there were 15,000 bad teachers? Does he agree that they were employed by the lot opposite--the Opposition-- in the late 1970s by loony left councils and are still a
Mr. Squire:
In his typically understated way, my hon. Friend has hit on several excellent points. It is critical that governing bodies across the country should be able--they have the powers--to remove bad teachers. I should stress, in case there is any doubt, that they have those powers. As to the latter part of my hon. Friend's question, I noticed only this month, by chance, that Sheffield city council passed a motion in which it condemned the hypocrisy of senior Labour politicians in seeking privileges for their children in contradiction of their own stated education policy. I could not put it better.
Mr. Barry Jones:
Why did not the Government make it harder for bad teachers to enter the profession?
Mr. Squire:
The hon. Gentleman knows enough about education to know how long the average teacher is employed in our schools. On reflection, he will recognise that, despite the steps that the Government have taken to tighten up on the quality of new teachers, we still have in our schools--as the chief inspector makes clear in his independent report--15,000 very bad teachers. However, I must put that in context. We are talking of some 15,000 people in a profession composed of nearly 400,000, and there are many excellent teachers who are doing a very good job. Our concern is to ensure that we minimise, if not eliminate, those who are not.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |