| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Schools (Repairs)
16. Mrs. Jane Kennedy: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proposals she has to reduce the backlog of repairs in schools. [20139]
Mrs. Gillan: Repair and maintenance of school buildings are the responsibility of local education authorities and individual governing bodies. Planned central Government support for capital work in maintained schools in 1996-97 is nearly £700 million--an increase of 6.7 per cent. on 1995-96.
Mrs. Kennedy: Notwithstanding that increase, does the Minister recognise that capital spending on schools has been halved in real terms in the past 20 years? Is that not an indictment of the Government's policy on school repairs? What hope can the Minister offer to the governors, local education authority officers and the teachers at Ashfield special school in my constituency who are waiting for repairs to take place at the two sites at which they work while trying to deliver education to children who are already disadvantaged? Would they not
be better off applying to the national lottery rather than waiting for the Government to take their problems seriously?
Mrs. Gillan: I cannot agree with the hon. Lady. She has taken a convenient bite out of time. A more recent bite out of time shows that, since 1990, more than £5 billion has been spent on county, voluntary-aided and grant-maintained school buildings. I am surprised that the hon. Lady did not take the opportunity to congratulate the Government on their record for Liverpool LEA, which has just had a very good capital round, with five major projects put on the starts list for 1996-97 and two further projects put on the design list. That will deliver more than £4.5 million over three years from the Government to Liverpool. I would have thought that she would welcome that.
Training and Enterprise Councils
17. Mr. Hinchliffe: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what steps she takes to monitor the performance of individual training and enterprise councils. [20140]
Mr. Paice: The performance of individual training and enterprise councils is monitored regularly by Government regional offices.
Mr. Hinchliffe: I know that the Minister has been to Wakefield on at least one occasion recently. Is he aware of the considerable dissatisfaction with the performance of Wakefield training and enterprise council, which has no relationship with the local authority, hardly any relationship with local schools and no relationship with the district college? How can we ensure that TECs, such as the one in Wakefield, become accountable to the local public? At the present time, they seem to be a law unto themselves.
Mr. Paice: As the hon. Gentleman said, I went to Wakefield in the autumn specifically to address the clear breakdown in the relationship between the TEC and local organisations. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, I have no direct powers to intervene, but I was anxious to smooth out the problem in whatever way I could. I understand that the relationship between the TEC and the college is now considerably improved, but I do not necessarily claim credit for that. Much work has been done by our regional staff to try to improve the situation. The latest information I have is that it is much better.
I do not know why Wakefield is almost alone among TECs in having a bad relationship with the local community, because across the country matters have worked well after a rocky start. I will keep a close eye on the situation in Wakefield and I hope that it will continue to improve.
Mr. Ian McCartney:
On 29 December last year, I wrote to the Secretary of State about the fact that TECs had sent trainees into circumstances that led to 1,750 of them being injured. On one occasion, a death took place. The Secretary of State was kind enough to reply and she gave me an assurance, with the Health and Safety Executive, that improvements would be made to ensure that there was a reduction in accidents involving trainees.
Today, a letter has been produced by the Health and Safety Executive which suggests that the Department of the Environment and the Department for Education and Employment are involved in cutting that body's resources to the extent that it cannot fulfil its commitments. The reply given to me by the Secretary of State has been thrown away by the Department's plan, in secret with the Department of the Environment, to cut grants to the Health and Safety Executive. That will lead to death and injuries in the workplace. Does the Secretary of State intend to make a statement about the involvement of her Department in managing reductions in the budget of the Health and Safety Executive?
Mr. Paice:
The hon. Member is shroud waving and making damaging statements about health and safety on Government training programmes.
On the subject of the resources of the Health and Safety Executive, the hon. Gentleman should address his question to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, who is responsible for that matter.
On Government training programmes, TECs are responsible for ensuring that every single placement of a Government-sponsored trainee, be it on a youth training scheme or in training for work, is backed up by a positive health and safety policy. The categorical assurances that my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Gentleman in the letter remain in place. We will not have trainees put knowingly into any position of danger.
18. Mr. Jenkin:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what is the proportion of the working age population employed in the United Kingdom; and what are the figures in other EU countries. [20141]
Mr. Forth:
In the UK, 68 per cent. of the working age population are in employment. That is the highest percentage of the major European countries and well above the European Union average.
Mr. Jenkin:
Is my hon. Friend aware that UK jobs are more secure than the average in the European Union? The number of temporary jobs as a proportion of all employees is 6.5 per cent. in the UK but 10 per cent. in Germany, 11 per cent. in France and a staggering 33.5 per cent. in formerly socialist Spain. If people want job security, should not they vote for our labour market policies instead of for the social chapter?
Mr. Forth:
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for a telling point that completely gives the lie to the Opposition's argument, spurious as ever, when they harp on about job security. As my hon. Friend said, the number of temporary jobs in this country is small compared with the number that most of our continental partners experience. That tells its own tale and powerfully reinforces the point that job security is much greater in the UK than it is among our partners and competitors on the European mainland.
Mr. Eastham:
What value can be put on the Government's employment figures, when we know that they have been massaged 32 times? Government employment figures include as part-time workers even people who work only one hour per week.
Mr. Forth:
I am puzzled by the Opposition's obsession with unemployment figures. I assume that most Labour
The Secretary of State for Health (Mr. Stephen Dorrell):
With permission, Madam Speaker, I should like to make a statement about the latest advice that the Government have received from the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee. The House will be aware that the committee, which is chaired by Professor John Pattison, was established in 1990 to bring together leading experts in neurology, epidemiology and microbiology, to provide scientifically based advice on the implications for animal and human health of different forms of spongiform encephalopathy.
The committee provides independent advice to Government. Its members are not Government scientists, but leading practitioners in their field. The purpose of the committee is to provide advice not simply to Government but to the whole community on the scientific questions that arise in its field. The Government have always made it clear that it is our policy to base our decisions on the scientific advice provided by the advisory committee. The committee has today agreed new advice about the implications for animal and human health of the latest scientific evidence. Copies of the committee's advice, together with a statement from the chief medical officer that is based on that advice, have been placed in the Vote Office.
The committee has considered the work being done by the Government surveillance unit in Edinburgh, which specialises in Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. That work, which relates to the 10 cases of CJD that have been identified in people aged under 42, has led the committee to conclude that the unit has identified a previously unrecognised and consistent disease pattern. A review of patients' medical histories, genetic analysis and consideration of other possible causes have failed to explain those cases adequately.
There remains no scientific proof that bovine spongiform encephalopathy can be transmitted to man by beef, but the committee has concluded that the most likely explanation at present is that those cases are linked to exposure to BSE before the introduction of the specified bovine offal ban in 1989. Against the background of that new finding, the committee has today agreed a series of recommendations, which the Government are making public this afternoon.
The committee's recommendations are in two parts. First, it recommends a series of measures to reduce further the risk to human and animal health associated with BSE. My right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will make a statement about those measures that fall within his Department's responsibilities immediately after questions on this statement have been concluded.
In addition, the committee recommended that there should be urgent consideration of what further research is needed in this area, and that the Health and Safety Executive and the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens should urgently review their advice.The Government intend to accept all the recommendations of the advisory committee in full; they will be put into effect as soon as possible.
The second group of recommendations from the committee offers advice about food safety, on the assumption that the further measures recommended by
the committee are implemented. On that basis, the committee concluded that the risk from eating beef is now likely to be extremely small and that there is no need for it to revise its advice on the safety of milk.
The chief medical officer will write today to all doctors, to ensure that the latest scientific evidence is drawn to their attention. In the statement by the chief medical officer that I have placed in the Vote Office, Sir Kenneth Calman poses to himself the question whether he will continue to eat beef. I quote his answer:
3.31 pm
"I will do so as part of a varied and balanced diet. The new measures and effective enforcement of existing measures will continue to ensure that the likely risk of developing CJD is extremely small."
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |