| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Dr. Desmond Turner: My hon. Friend referred to stability. Would he care to contrast the record of business failures under the pre-1997 Government with the present Government's record, and the number of successful start-ups under this Government?
John Healey: I am not sure whether my hon. Friend heard what I said earlier. Stability is important not only to families and Government, but to business. Not just steady growth but stability in the economy has been a major factor in the present state of affairs: we now have 300,000 more businesses in Britain than we had in 1997.
It was a pleasure to hear my former Treasury colleague, the new Secretary of State for Education and Skills, set out the imperative and the plans for investment in education and skills. The work done jointly by her Department and the Treasury is strong, which last week's Budget underlined and which tomorrow's skills White Paper will also underline.
My hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North (Dr. Gibson), who is recognised in all parts of the House as one of its foremost authorities on science, identified the elements of the Budget—such as the boost for stem cell research—that will help our science base. He also spoke of the way in which innovation, invention and intellectual property need to be developed and transferred to business activity.
The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) welcomed the Budget, which he described as brimming with extras for education. I am pleased about that. The hon. Gentleman has lost none of the
21 Mar 2005 : Column 697
passion, inspiration and ambition for education that he had as a head teacher: eight years in the House of Commons have not dimmed any of that. He asked two principal questions: how the plans for capital investment in primary schools will be prioritised, and whether voluntary-aided primary schools will fall within that capital programme. The answer to the second question is yes, but as he will appreciate the answer to the first needs more consultation and is likely to be set out by the Secretary of State in detail in due course. However, she was with me when he made his contribution, and she was listening carefully.
As the hon. Gentleman pointed out, he and I both spoke at this year's Association of Colleges conference in Birmingham; indeed, I suspect that we spoke at last year's conference as well. We are both strong supporters of further education, which offers a breadth of learning to a range of learners that is simply unmatched by any other part of the education system. I am pleased that he welcomes the Budget boost to the capital infrastructure of, and plans for, FE—a point that my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, South (Mr. Cunningham) also stressed.
My hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich, West (Mr. Bailey) rightly identified the low skills base and the need for more science and research in his constituency—issues that are also at the centre of the future economic challenges that this country as a whole faces. We want families to open the child trust funds that he talked about, but if they do not the Inland Revenue will do so for them, so that no child will miss out on investing the money provided by the Government. As he suggested, we will also look at ways in which new parents can get information about the child tax credit.
My hon. Friend the Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Dr. Turner) clearly goaded the Conservatives, who intervened on him more times than they did on anyone else. He made the very fair point that on listening to them, one would imagine that their £35 billion-worth of cuts was somehow dreamt up by Labour. That is not our claim but it is their commitment: it is set out on the record, repeatedly, by the shadow Chancellor. My hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, South made it clear that he and his constituents know that, as sure as night follows day, cuts come with a Conservative Government. That was a warning to the whole House and to the country as we approach a possible general election.
My hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Iain Wright) made an incisive first speech in a Budget debate. He reminded the House of how hard his home town was hit by the Tories—by a Government who mismanaged the economy and drove it into recession not just once, but twice. It is working-class families and towns, and areas such as his in the north-east, that bore the brunt of past economic failure and mismanagement.
My hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North (Mr. Hopkins) put on the record his congratulations to the Bank of England for its management of monetary policy. That will be both welcome and a surprise to the Governor of the Bank of England, who is not known for being a proponent of that policy. But my hon. Friend
21 Mar 2005 : Column 698
then took apart very effectively the myths promoted by the Conservatives, and he rightly stressed that the fundamentals of the British economy are strong.
My hon. Friend the Member for Edmonton (Mr. Love) developed that theme and in doing so reflected his regular service on Finance Bills and his close following of Treasury matters. He rightly said that what clearly sticks in the Conservatives' craw is giving credit to a Labour Chancellor for the successful management of the economy. My hon. Friend also reminded us that the Conservatives somehow regard the past eight years as being down to the economic legacy of the last Conservative Government. It is easy to get an economy moving again after a deep recession such as that experienced in the early 1990s, when there was the fiasco of sterling crashing out of the exchange rate mechanism; the hard part is putting in place the policies to sustain that growth, along with low inflation, low interest rates and high employment.
It is also worth remembering that in 1997 interest rates were higher, unemployment was higher, debt was higher, the last Conservative Government were spending more on servicing government debt than on education, and inflation was back in the system. That was the legacy that this Government inherited from the last one.The hon. Member for Fareham (Mr. Hoban) constructed a rather lengthy argument about public service targets, information capture and inspection. I have to tell him that, frankly, it is wishful thinking to believe that his party can somehow find £35 billion-worth of savings from spending on such measures. If the hon. Gentleman sacked every single civil servant in this country, it would save just £20 billion.
Mr. Francois: Let us nail this £35 billion once and for all. As my right hon. Friend the shadow Chancellor said in The Guardian this morning, our spending plans involve
The ITN reporter Nick Robinson completely middle stumped the Prime Minister on this matter last Thursday, so Ministers should stop repeating the assertion, which is based on desperation resulting from the canvass returns that Labour Members are receiving in their constituencies.
John Healey: If the hon. Gentleman reads the record, he will see that that is not what I said. I am providing the House with an indication of the huge scale of £35 billion-worth of savings in Government spending and pointing out that deep cuts will inevitably follow if any Government set out on that path. [Interruption.] I shall return to the issue in a few moments.
The hon. Member for Upminster (Angela Watkinson) expressed genuine concern about early years provision. She is right about the wide range of needs that parents and children have. I was pleased to hear about the success of the Sure Start programme at Harold Hill in her constituency, but I have to say that I do not recognise the figures that she provided on so-called cuts in child care places. There has been a net increase, confirmed in the 10-year child care strategy published alongside the pre-Budget report in December, of 525,000 places in a wide range of child care settings, including nurseries and the provisions of child minders before and after school clubs—precisely the sort of provision that the hon. Lady urged on us.
21 Mar 2005 : Column 699
The hon. Member for Worthing, West (Peter Bottomley) has been in the Chamber for most of this afternoon, but is not in his place now. I recognise his long-standing membership of the Transport and General Workers Union and pay tribute to the fact that it was he who first mentioned in today's debate the support that the Government are providing for union skills and learning, and, in particular, for the new union learning academy, which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor announced in the Budget last week. He asked about commercial stamp duty, disadvantaged areas and the operation of film tax relief. I wanted to tell him that the answers to his questions are set out in the Budget press releases, but if he cannot find them, I would be happy to provide further details.
In common with the hon. Member for Rayleigh, I like to recognise, if I have time, the contributions of all hon. Members who speak in a debate. I have to admit, frankly, that the hon. Member for New Forest, West (Mr. Swayne) had me stumped. The House did learn, however, that he taught A-level economics and that he reckons to be able to get an attentive Labrador through the exams. I take that less as a commentary on the Budget than as a bid for a Front-Bench job in the shadow Treasury team.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |