| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Sheerman: My hon. Friend puts his finger on the problem. There are many issues on which there is all-party agreement, but in terms of budgets and allocations and getting research and development priorities right, we must highlight party political as well as cross-party aspects.
Mr. Battle: I accept what my hon. Friend says.We must know the truth about the figures so that we can agree on them and do something about them. I know that my hon. Friend is most concerned about higher and further education. The fact that there have been cuts of up to £300 million to the Higher Education Funding Council, and that the funding for capital--for the laboratories at universities--has been cut, seems to suggest that the Government could be in danger of devouring the very seedcorn that we need for future development. I hope that all hon. Members agree about that so that we can make representations at Budget time for proper back-up for science, engineering and technology; otherwise, it will be seen that the Government are not enabling science, engineering and technology to flourish.
Engineering could be vital to the future of our country in terms of the new industries--especially the new environmental industries--developments in transportation, energy, alternatives and renewables, telecommunications and even cleaning up the environment. Yorkshire Water has been mentioned. The irony, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Halton (Mr. Oakes) said, is that it was our great engineers who built incredible reservoirs with such vision and capacity in the last century. Why are we not applying our best technology to--dare I say it--look again at the aquifer in Yorkshire and open up the bore holes so that we have local supplies of water again? There are technological options that have not beenproperly explored.
As the hon. Member for Lewes said, there are developments such as leanburn engines and battery-powered cars and buses that could create wealth, add to the quality of our lives and take us through into the next century. Positive proposals should be built on--even small ones. The Royal Academy of Engineering has pioneered the visiting professor scheme. We could build on the technology transfer models of Cambridge and Imperial college. In my city, the Leeds engineering initiative pulls together the training and enterprise council and private industry to push the profile of engineering to ensure that its 1,800 engineering firms network their activities, win markets and so perform better than the national average.
The Minister for Small Business, Industry and Energy (Mr. Richard Page):
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Lewes (Mr. Rathbone), not on getting this slot--that is like getting a few numbers on the lottery--but on his choice of subject. As has been said, we would need another couple of hours to scratch the surface of this important matter. My hon. Friend and I were members of the all-party engineering development group, which for several years stressed the crucial need for the United Kingdom to strengthen its engineering capacity. It gives an important insight into the requirements of engineering. My hon. Friend served as chairman, while I was a spear-carrier. He gave a masterly round-up, which I endorse.
I shall not discuss small firms even though I am the Minister responsible for them, because that would hijack the debate and its emphasis would be lost. All hon. Members stressed the importance of engineering. We agree on that, although the hon. Member for Leeds, West(Mr. Battle) introduced a discordant note near the end with which I disagree. Time is not on my side to rebut fully everything that he said.
We have continually emphasised the importance of engineering in the 1993 White Paper "Realising our Potential: A Strategy for Science, Engineering and
Technology", in the 1994 White Paper "Competitiveness: Helping Business to Win" and in the 1995 White Paper "Competitiveness: Forging Ahead". As night follows day, there will be a follow-up in 1996.
Mr. Sheerman:
Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Page:
I shall not give way because I have only eight minutes and I have much to add. While the hon. Gentleman would like to get his thruppenceworth in,I have a couple of pounds' worth to contribute which is much more important than anything that he could possibly say.
Let me put a handle on how important engineering is to the United Kingdom. In 1994, the latest year for which figures are available, the gross output of UK engineering was £114.6 billion--£38 billion of gross value added, which is 31 per cent. of gross value added by all manufacturing. There were about 1.156 million engineering jobs in November 1995 compared with1.121 million a year earlier--an increase that is at odds with what the hon. Member for Leeds, West said.In November 1995, engineering employment accounted for 29.8 per cent. of manufacturing employment. In 1994, exports of £71.5 billion--more than half our manufacturing exports--came from engineering. In 1995, our trade deficit was £1.53 billion, a decrease of 64.9 per cent. on the year before. That improvement is again at odds what the hon. Member for Leeds, West said.
An activity is as good as the people involved in it, and engineering is no exception. Let us be blunt: despite our best efforts so far, the UK does not, as yet, compare as we would wish with overseas competitors. My hon. Friend the Member for Lewes mentioned mathematics.I was trained as a mechanical engineer and I can only endorse its importance.
After the publication of the London Mathematical Society report "Tackling the Mathematics Problem",my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment wrote to the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority, the Office for Standards in Education and the Teacher Training Agency for their advice on current maths issues. Initiatives and changes are coming from that. For example, maths has been identified by the TTA as a priority for in-service training and it has commissioned research into the effective teaching of numeracy. That evidence will be disseminated to teachers.
My hon. Friend talked about calculator-free examinations and classwork. I went round a primary school in my constituency only last week and found eight and nine-year-olds using calculators. It speeds things up, but I wonder whether it is the right way to get into children's minds how sums work before they start to use electronic supports. A calculator-free test for 11-year-olds will be introduced in 1996. The SCAA has been asked to consider a mental arithmetic test for 11 and 14-year-olds for next year.
In the United Kingdom, as hon. Members have said, only 12 per cent. of science and engineering graduates are in engineering. In Germany, the figure is 18 per cent.;in France, it is 21 per cent. Germany produces a third more engineering and technology PhDs per head of population than we do and five times as many of its people are qualified to MSc standard. The in-company training of engineers is an important feature in Japan and
other competitors. I agree that we need to thrust forward to try to improve the concept of and approach to engineering.
We are starting to tackle the problem in a sustained and dynamic fashion. For example, as has been mentioned, this is the third annual Science, Engineering and Technology Week. I disagree with the right hon. Member for Halton (Mr. Oakes), who made some solid points. However, it is a matter not only of throwing money at a problem but of enthusing the hearts and minds of people in the industry so that they take the drive forward and do not sit around waiting for tablets of stone from politicians, some of whom have little industrial or practical experience in the sectors on which they pontificate.
This is the third annual Science, Engineering and Technology Week. Today has been earmarked as Women in Science, Engineering and Technology Day to raise awareness of that. Several thousand events will take place across the UK over the next few days. They range in location from Penzance to the Orkneys and in topics from astrophysics to zoology. It is one of the biggest annual celebrations of science, engineering and technology in the world. Down in the bowels of the Department of Trade and Industry, there is a most impressive exhibition which runs all week. I went yesterday and came away most impressed.
The technology foresight programme was alluded to obliquely by my hon. Friend the Member for North-West Leicestershire (Mr. Ashby). He put his finger on the point and pressed hard the need to keep up with innovation and development. Time is not on my side to go through all the key points that are emerging from the foresight initiative, but they will be an important message to and support for engineering.
I was impressed by the fact that the hon. Member for Leeds, West brought his hip replacement. He is planning for the future. I must chide him slightly on his selective quotations from the Engineering Employers Federation report, because I can selectively quote back by pointing out that
"Forty-one per cent. of the firms say that output is rising whilst only 28 per cent. reported a decrease . . . Larger firms report a downturn in new orders from the UK market but a positive trend in export new markets. Only the smaller firms"--
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |