§ 7. Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West)If he will make a statement about his plans for university tuition fees in Scotland. [84133]
§ The Secretary of State for Scotland (Dr. John Reid)I refer the hon Member to the answer that I gave to the hon. Member for Lichfield (Mr. Fabricant) a few moments ago.
§ Mr. SwayneNo, I asked the Secretary of State about his plan—his own plan—for tertiary education. He told my hon. Friend the Member for Lichfield (Mr. Fabricant) the plan for the Scottish Parliament. The Secretary of State still has more than a month in which to implement any plans that he may have. The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that, this academic year, students in Scotland will pay about £19 million in fees, but only £4 million will go to the institutions as additional funding. What did the Prime Minister mean when he said before the election that he had no intention of introducing such fees? Was it merely rhetoric—much like the rhetoric of the hon. and learned Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Wallace)?
§ Dr. ReidIn the first place, I think that I answered the hon. Gentleman's question by saying that our plans had been outlined in July 1997. If he checks Hansard he will see that that was my answer before I referred to the Scottish Parliament's decision. I think that the gist of the hon. Gentleman's question is, "Are our plans good plans?" I think that they are not only good but fair. Most people would accept that, if we are trying to fund a fairly massive extension of entry to higher education, it is fair and reasonable to say that those on the average income or below will make no contribution towards fees—more than 50 per cent. of the recent intake were in that position. Those who are on slightly above average income should make some contribution and those who are on an income of £28,000 a year should pay the full amount, which is a maximum total of £1,000.
154 Those are reasonable plans that reflect not only the need for us all collectively to provide for the least privileged, but the increased earning capacity of those who have the benefit of education at universities or at higher level. The plans were and are reasonable. If the Scottish Parliament should decide that it has priorities in another direction or wishes to make a decision in a different fashion, that is a devolved power that it has. I am sure that in this country we can live with the reflection of local needs and priorities in a fashion that does not need the synthetic rage that the hon. Gentleman managed to conjure up.
§ Mr. Michael Moore (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale)I add my congratulations to the Secretary of State on his new position and wish him every success. He is clearly enjoying it so far. Does he agree that the essence of devolution is that political problems and issues can have different solutions in different parts of the United Kingdom? Are not tuition fees a particularly good example of an instance where Scotland can have a different policy from the rest of the United Kingdom?
§ Dr. ReidI thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. On the question of enjoying it, it has been all right so far, but we have not gone a long way yet. His general proposition, that the essence of devolution is that we have to countenance the fact that people will make their own decisions within the areas prescribed to them, is correct. That is why I said in my first answer that I genuinely believe that the unity of the United Kingdom will be strengthened by a recognition of our diversity within these islands.
However, with rights go responsibilities for all of us. Whether in this Parliament, the Scottish Parliament or local councils, if people wish to put more money and resources towards a given priority, they have the obligation to explain to their constituents where they are taking the money from and why something else has been deprioritised. That applies to all of us. Provided that we all do that, and work with good will and partnership, I think that devolution in Scotland, and decentralisation throughout the United Kingdom, will be a great boon to the unity of this United Kingdom.