HC Deb 18 December 1958 vol 597 cc1286-90
12. Mr. G. Thomas

asked the Minister of Education what alteration he made in the Cardiff City Education Authority's building programme for 1959–60; and whether he will make a statement.

Sir E. Boyle

Of the eight primary and' secondary school building projects proposed by the Cardiff local education authority for inclusion in the 1959–60 programme, four were accepted, one was placed in reserve, one is under further consideration and two were inadmissible under current policy.

Mr. Thomas

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that there is a great need for further secondary school places in the Canton district of Cardiff? Can he give an idea when we shall be able to have extended secondary school facilities in that part of the city?

Sir E. Boyle

I thought that it was the Canton project which the hon. Gentleman had in mind. The project under further consideration is for the provision of new premises for Canton High School at an estimated cost of £178,000, which the hon. Gentleman will recognise is a large project. I know that the existing premises are not wholly satisfactory, but the authority's case for providing new premises depends, under current policy, on the need for more grammar school places in the city. As I implied in my previous Answer, my right hon. Friend is now examining this matter with care. I cannot say more than that today.

16. Mr. Warbey

asked the Minister of Education whether, in cases where local education authorities have already submitted proposals for urgent school building projects of the type described in the recent White Paper, he will authorise them to commence building in 1959–60 instead of waiting until 1960–61 or later.

Sir E. Boyle

My right hon. Friend cannot increase the 1959–60 school building programme, but he will be ready, as hitherto, to consider substituting a project from a later programme for one in the 1959–60 programme when this would be convenient.

Mr. Warbey

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the White Paper refers to the urgency of replacing makeshift schools, and that the Kirkby Mowlands School in my constituency is a makeshift school consisting of 16ft. span Nissen huts into which 950 children are crowded, where there is inadequate ventilation and a very poor atmosphere? Why cannot a project of that type be brought into early construction instead of having to be deferred until 1960 or later, or else put in the place of some other project?

Sir E. Boyle

From 1960–61 onwards we hope to be able to include in the programme a limited number of categories of schools which have had to be excluded from the programme by successive Governments until hitherto. My right hon. Friend hopes to settle the major building programmes for 1960–61 and 1961–62 in the early months of next year.

Mr. M. Stewart

Why does the hon. Gentleman say that the Minister cannot increase the 1959–60 programme? Surely it is not a physical impossibility to do so. Why cannot he consider it?

Sir E. Boyle

Because my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has recently announced that capital expenditure in the public sector will be £150 million higher next year than last year, and the school building programme has to be planned against that background.

19. Mr. Swingler

asked the Minister of Education what representations he has received for an immediate increase in the school building programme in the current year.

Sir E. Boyle

None recently. As already announced, my right hon. Friend is prepared to authorise some minor projects to start in 1958–59 instead of 1959–60.

Mr. Swingler

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of unemployment in the building trade all over the country and of idle building resources? Would he not, therefore, reconsider the question of enlarging the existing programme in view of the fact that there are building workers and building materials available? The question is whether the Ministry will recognise the urgent need to get on with the programme.

Sir E. Boyle

There is not much scope for adding major projects so late in the programme, but my right hon. Friend is always ready to consider a proposal to bring forward the starting date of a particular project on which planning is already well advanced. If the hon. Gentleman's authority has any proposals of this kind to bring forward, we will consider them.

Mr. Chetwynd

Does not this answer and the answer to Question No. 16 mean that the Government have no substantial plans for a great increase in school building in the next twelve months?

Sir E. Boyle

The programme for 1959–60 has already been announced and we have to consider that programme against the general background of capital expenditure in the public sector. But the Government have a large programme for expanding school building for the years starting 1960–61.

Mr. Jay

As the general economic position of the country requires an expansion of building activity, why cannot the Chancellor agree to a larger building programme for 1959–60?

Sir E. Boyle

The right hon. Gentleman is well aware of how dangerous it is when we have got the economy back under control to relax too quickly and too soon. No one ought to know that better than right hon. Gentlemen opposite.

21. Mr. Warbey

asked the Minister of Education what, on the basis of approvals given by him, is the estimated value of major school building projects to be started in each of the years 1958–59 and 1959–60.

Sir E. Boyle

About £51 million and £46 million.

Mr. Warbey

Do not these figures reveal the extent to which essential education building has suffered under the present Government as a result of the policy which the Parliamentary Secretary revealed in answer to my previous Question? In view of the decline in essential school building during the present period, do not the figures given in the White Paper for 1960–62 show that this is really nothing but election window-dressing and has no connection with the reality of the Government's intention?

Sir E. Boyle

I do not think there is a single point in the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question with which I can agree. There has never been a time in history when the education service fared better than under the present Government. It is only reasonable that the make-up of the education building programme as a whole should vary from year to year. My right hon. Friend has given details of the whole programme in answer to the hon. Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) on an earlier occasion. The total value of the programmes for 1958–59 and 1959–60 will be almost the same in those years. We should not forget that next year we are making a start with the enlarged training college programme which is of great importance to all children.

Mr. M. Stewart

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I remember very well the answer which was given to me, but when one studies that with the answer which has been given to my hon. Friend and compares them with the increase in the number of children, one finds it difficult to accept the favourable conclusion which the hon. Gentleman draws?

Sir E. Boyle

We are making a good start with the training college programme. We have been able to reduce the size of the classes in primary schools without worsening the position in secondary schools, and we can point to a favourable trend which has been maintained.