§ 22. Mr. Wainwrightasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give the total amount granted for the development of universities and for university education for the quinquennial period ending 1961–62, and the amount by which that sum has been effectively reduced as a result of the devaluation of the £ sterling.
§ Sir E. BoyleThe total requested in the first part of the Question is £307 million. It is not practicable to perform the calculation requested in the second part of the Question because the total is made up of yearly amounts on a rising programme and includes supplementary grants for increased salaries and other costs during the five-year period.
§ Mr. WainwrightDoes the Financial Secretary say that universities cannot take into account erosion of the amount which would be granted at the beginning of the quinquennium? Is he aware that even his own university has lost £300,000 in value in the last quinquennium due to the erosion of the grant? How does the hon. Gentleman and the Government expect us to have the best universities in the world if we allow the grant to be eroded at the present rate?
§ Sir E. BoyleThe figure of £307 million which I mentioned is the total of all grants made available for current and capital expenditure during the past quinquennium. In the next quinquennium, without taking account of any allowance for rising costs or changes on review of salaries, grants for current expenditure alone will be as much as £329 million. Those are striking figures. My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury has made it quite clear on a number of occasions that any increase attributable to improvements 194 in academic salaries will be met by additional grant. The Government have also undertaken that further increases in building costs will be sympathetically considered.
§ Mr. WainwrightIs the hon. Gentleman saying that he is quite satisfied with the amount of money made available and the number of places in the universities? Is he aware that in California, for instance, 50 per cent. of students of the relevant age group will be able to go to university before 1965? Cannot we have more money for our universities to provide more places?
§ Sir E. BoyleWith great respect, we have debated this question already and we cannot debate it again at Question Time. I was not so much expressing satisfaction or dissatisfaction as reminding the House of figures which I think are striking and which seem to have been neglected in public debate on this matter.
§ Mr. CallaghanWhatever the figures, is it not the case that young men and women whose ability and talents command places are to be denied the opportunity because of insufficient finance?
§ Sir E. BoyleAs long as the relevant age group is rising we hope that a constant proportion will get to the university. After that, a larger proportion will get in, and I do not think that that is a record to be ashamed of.