§ 21. Mr. Swinglerasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education if he will now take steps to enlarge the school building programme.
§ 25. Lord Balnielasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education whether he will make a statement about the school building programmes for 1957–58 and 1958–59.
§ Sir E. BoyleMy noble Friend proposes to increase the school building programme for 1957–58 from £50 million, as announced in Circular 306 of June, 1956, to £55 million, the same size as the programme for 1956–57. To give effect to this, certain local education authorities have already been told that a number of urgent projects may be brought forward to start in 1957–58. My noble Friend will also approve a programme of £55 million for 1958–59.
§ Mr. SwinglerWhile being grateful for small mercies and welcoming the increase announced, may I ask if the Parliamentary Secretary is aware that it may not be quite as big as it appears on the surface because of the increase in costs? Will he continue to translate the Minister's verbal vigour into action in order that the needs of the children in overcrowded classrooms may be met?
§ Sir E. BoyleThere is a Question later on the Paper relating to a substantial reduction in costs per place. On the other point, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that both vigorous words and strong action will continue to be employed.
§ Lord BalnielWhile welcoming this increase, may I ask my hon. Friend whether it will enable a reduction in school classes to be achieved or whether it is merely an increase which will enable us to keep pace with the increasing school population?
§ Sir E. BoyleThe question of the reduction of school classes is a separate one, but there is no reason to go back on the more optimistic forecast which I gave some six weeks ago in answer to a Question.
§ Mr. M. StewartDoes the hon. Gentleman observe that it means that the money figure will have remained stationary for four years? Although in the past there has been a reduction in cost per place, I shall be surprised if the hon. Gentleman expects the reduction to go on at the rate it has done. Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that it is difficult to reconcile the stationary money figure with the way in which his noble Friend is talking about educational expenditure?
§ Sir E. BoyleMy noble Friend was saying in his speech, which I think received a warm welcome in the country, 1298 that he did not believe that 3 per cent. of the gross national product was an excessive sum to spend on the nation's education. With that I should have thought there would have been general agreement in the House.
§ 22. Mr. Swinglerasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education how many projects which were included in the 1955–56 school building programme have not yet been started; and which local authorities are involved.
§ Sir E. BoyleOn 31st January 65 of these projects had not been started. Thirty-two local education authorities are involved. I am sending the hon. Member a list of them.
§ Mr. SwinglerDoes this not demonstrate the need for a thoroughgoing review of the school building programme? Does not the Answer say that there are still 65 projects which could have been started before last March and which have not yet been started? Will the Parliamentary Secretary urge an inquiry into the reason why there are still these arrears. which are nearly 12 months late, and ensure that in the next educational building programme these projects are included in anything that is now planned?
§ Sir E. BoyleThe failure of the 65 projects to start before 31st March, 1956, was due to a variety of reasons. But I can tell the hon. Gentleman that partly as a result of the credit squeeze and the tight restrictions on borrowing for investment purposes and other reasons, the labour force engaged in educational building has increased substantially during the past year.