§ 64. Sir J. BUTCHERasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the fact that the Estimates for the administration of the Board of Education for the present financial year are £376,000 as against £286,000 for last year, for inspection and examination £361,000 for this year as against £274,000 for last year, and for the total Education Vote £45,755,000 for this year as against £32,772,000 for last year, he will set up a Committee to investigate the expenditure of the Board of Education in addition to the seven other Departments for which Committees are to be set up?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Chamberlain)I understand that a Sub-Committee of the Select Committee on National Expenditure is now examining the Board of Education Estimates, and in these circumstances I do not think that the immediate appointment of another Committee is desirable.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERIn view of the fact that the expenditure of this Department is enormous over £37,000,000, and many Members consider a great deal of it wasteful and extravagant, will the right hon. Gentleman treat this Department 2592 in the same way as he has treated seven other Departments, for which Committees have been appointed?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINNo, Sir. The seven Departments referred to are not now being examined by the National Expenditure Committee. To appoint another Committee to do work which is actually being done by the National Expenditure Committee would obviously be not merely a waste of time, but destructive of the useful results from either. As I understand it, my hon. and learned Friend desires an inquiry, not into their staff and administrative organisation, but one into the whole policy of the Board of Education. If that is so, he should address his question to the Minister concerned.
Sir F. HALLDoes the right hon. Gentleman recognise the fact that, according to information obtained, it is expected that the Education Estimates for next year will exceed £73,000,000?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINI have only too much reason to bear in mind both the past, present, and prospective expenditure.
§ Mr. SPEAKERIt is undesirable at this stage to embark on an Education Debate.
§ 67. Sir J. BUTCHERasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, comparing the sum of £58,700,000, being the educational expenditure of the United Kingdom for the year 1920–21, with the sum of £73,000,000, being the estimated educational expenditure for a normal year, he will state how much of the £14,300,000 increase is due to the increase of teachers' salaries and pensions, and under what heads the rest of the increase falls?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINIt is obviously not practicable to give detailed estimates of the cost of particular educational services for some years in advance. It was necessary for the purposes of the White Paper to attempt a forecast of the total expenditure at the date when War services will have stopped. The figure of £73,000,000 was reached after considering all the circumstances which seemed relevant.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERIn view of the suggestion that the greater part of the £14,000,000 increase is due to the increase of the teachers' salaries, will the right hon. Gentleman say how much is actually due to that?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINNo, Sir. My hon. and learned Friend is really pressing me for details which I cannot be expected to be in a position to give. I was asked to provide an estimate for the normal year. I did it to the best of my ability. I cannot forecast at a moment's notice the expenditure two or three years in advance with that kind of accuracy which is expected in an Annual Vote.
Sir F. HALLIf the right hon. Gentleman cannot go into items and see how much is allocated to each, how can he reasonably arrive at the estimate of £73,000,000 without the figures?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINI have already told the House that the figures given for a normal year will never be the figures of any particular year. That is obvious. The use of that Paper is to give the House and the country some measure by which they can mark the growth of expenditure and the prospects of the future and can see the result of the action they take now.
§ Captain LOSEBYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware we have only had two hours' discussion on education in the past twenty months and will the House be given an opportunity to discus educational policy at an early date?
§ Mr. CHAMBERLAINI do not think that directly arises out of what has been said. At any rate, it is not a question for me.
85. Colonel NEWMANasked the President of the Board of Education whether, apart from the rise in the Education Vote from £18,760,000 in 1914–15 to £52,600,000 in the current financial year, he can give the House an estimate of the corresponding rise in the rate levied for educational purposes by the local authorities in Great Britain?
§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Fisher)The Vote of the Board of Education, which is concerned only with England and Wales, was, for 1914–15, £15,245,621. For 1920–21 it is £45,755,567. In 1914–15 the sum required 2594 from the rates for education (elementary and higher) in England and Wales was £16,860,000. In the year 1920–21 the local education authorities in England and Wales are, according to the figures supplied by them, raising £31,716,717 by rates. For the figures relating to Scotland, the hon. and gallant Member should address inquiries to my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland.
§ Lieut.-Colonel CROFTMay I ask whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer has protested with regard to this enormous expenditure?