§ Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the exact source from which he proposes to make good to the local education authorities the deficiency of the Local Taxation (Customs and Excise Residue) Fund hitherto applied for the purposes of higher education; what is the amount expected to be derived from such source; when this amount will be available; and what provision he proposes to make, pending its availability, to enable local education authorities to tide over their present financial difficulties, and maintain their secondary schools and other higher education institutions, classes, and schemes?
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI have nothing to add at present to the statement made in the Debate on Friday last.
§ Mr. WILLIAM PEELArising out of that answer, may I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that, in consequence of the shortage of this Fund, several local education authorities are reconsidering their educational schemes for secondary education?
§ Mr. SAMUEL ROBERTSMay T ask whether it is a fact that the old Sinking Fund automatically absorbs any balance?
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI do not think that is quite relevant to the question, because the half of the Land Tax I propose to allocate to this purpose is that half which does not interfere at all with that Fund. I may say, in answer to the hon. Member for Taunton, that I shall be sur- 453 prised to hear that any local authorities are prepared to cut down their expenses when there is every anticipation that the whole of their losses, within a few thousands, will be refunded.
§ Mr. G. A. FRANCEMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman when he expects to be able to make this statement with regard to this additional payment to the local authorities?
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI think it will not be possible to do it until after the Recess—until I sec how the taxes are coming in.