School Building Programme

HC Deb 28 February 1963 vol 672 cc1417-21

1. Mr. Fitch

asked the Minister of Education how many local education authorities in England and Wales failed to commence projects for which allocations were made in the 1961–62 building programme; and what was the total amount involved.

The Minister of Education (Sir Edward Boyle)

At 31st March, 1962, 97 authorities had not started projects in their 1961–62 major school building and further education programmes, valued at £39.5 million.

Mr. Fitch

Will the right hon. Gentleman warn those local authorities that unless they carry out their building programmes their allocations will be reassessed and given to local authorities which are willing and able to do the work?

Sir E. Boyle

There is always some time lag between the end of the programme year and the actual starts on the projects in that programme. It would not be fair to assume that all authorities that fail to begin their projects in the programme year are to be criticised because, in many cases, it is impracticable to start owing to site acquisition problems or planning difficulties. However, I agree that if it is clear that a project is not going to start within a foreseeable time and there is a need for another one which can be fitted in, whether in the major programme or that for minor works, we should bear that possibility in mind.

Mrs. Slater

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if any of these local authorities are affected by the shortage of, for in-stance, architects? Because of that shortage and acquisition of land problems, have they found it difficult to make a start in the programme year?

Sir E. Boyle

The hon. Lady knows that site acquisition problems can be very difficult. I think that it is usually because of either site acquisition problems or planning difficulties that projects get delayed.

18. Mr. Sydney Irving

asked the Minister of Education what changes in the cost of building have occurred since the original £300 million school building programme was announced in 1958; by how much would the £300 million have to be increased to produce the amount of building which it would have produced if prices had remained steady; and what adjustments have been made to annual programmes during the five years to allow for the increase in costs.

Sir E. Boyle

The official index of cost of new construction has risen by 8 per cent., and my cost limits, which were unchanged between 1955 and 1960, have risen by an average of 15 per cent. To allow fully for these changes, the £300 million school building programme would have to be increased to £316 million or to £344 million respectively. The answer to the last part of the Question is, "None, Sir".

Mr. Irving

The amounts have not been increased. Does not this confirm that not only was the programme inadequate when it was conceived in 1958 but that the targets then set have been eroded by the rising cost of living? Does not this clearly show the need for expanded capital investment in school building?

Sir E. Boyle

Of course, this is a point I shall bear in mind when settling with my colleagues the size of the programme, but I must ask the hon. Gentleman not to confuse starts with work done. Although we are now considering the last year, 1964–65, in terms of starts, we are barely half-way through the programme in terms of work done. While we try to keep within our authorisations, as one must, it is too early to forecast precisely the final value of the projects authorised during the five years 1960–61 to 1964–65.

Mr. Willey

But will not the Minister agree that, if we are considering the next two years, we can consider only starts, and it is not likely that over the next two years he will complete more than he starts? In view of this, will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that there is a serious shortfall on the programme envisaged in 1958, and will he bring the utmost pressure to bear on his colleagues to see that the programmes for these two years are considerably increased?

Sir E. Boyle

It is too late now to reconsider the 1963–64 programme, but, as the hon. Gentleman knows, I have not stated to the House a final figure for the 1964–65 programme. I made the announcement when I did because it is very important for local authorities to be able to get on with some planning ahead with projects for the following year.

23. Dame Irene Ward

asked the Minister of Education if he will state the school building programme agreed for the county borough of Tynemouth, and for the Northumberland County Council as it affects Whitley Bay.

Sir E. Boyle

The major building programmes for 1964–65 recently announced include the extension of the Tynemouth High School for Girls and the completion of the Briardene County Primary School at Whitley Bay.

Dame Irene Ward

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that Answer, may I ask him whether this includes anything in addition under the money which is supposed to be allocated to the North-East Coast in support of the noble Lord who is looking after our interests?

Sir E. Boyle

We are talking about the 1964–65 major building programme. With regard to the North-East, what I have done is to allow more for minor works which can be started during the current financial year. That is a rather different matter. I am glad that I seem to have given my hon. Friend more satisfaction than I have given her for what seems like some years.

28. Mr. Fitch

asked the Minister of Education if he will now increase the allocation for school building in those areas where unemployment is over 5 per cent.

Sir E. Boyle

As part of the Government's measures to relieve unemployment, I removed last December the limit on the amount of minor works costing up to £20,000 which certain authorities in the North-East and Merseyside might start by 31st March next, provided the period of construction would not exceed six months. As a result extra building valued at £2 million is likely to he undertaken.

Increases in major projects, which take longer to plan and build, are not suitable for relieving temporary unemployment.

Mr. Fitch

Would not the Minister agree that in areas of high unemployment, one often finds out-of-date school buildings? Is it not a question of killing two birds with one stone?

Sir E. Boyle

It is exactly because the Government fully realise the point that we made the relaxation concerning minor works, which could be undertaken fairly quickly. As my Answer shows, that will result in quite a lot of extra work being done over and above the programme originally announced.

Dr. Bray

Is the Minister saying that it is not possible to look forward even one year on the load that will be placed upon the building industry in areas of high unemployment? Is he saying that there will be no unemployment in the North-East and on Merseyside in a year's time when this school building programme starts to take effect?

Sir E. Boyle

No. What I am saying is that when one considers the major building programme for 1964–65, for example, it will affect mainly the load on the building industry for 1965 and 1966. I assure the hon. Member that the picture then of the construction industries must be considered carefully and might be very different from what it is today.

29. Mr. Willey

asked the Minister of Education the value of the projects started or to be started in each of the years of the building programme for primary and secondary schools during the five years from 1960–61 to 1964–65.

Sir E. Boyle

Actual starts were £57.2 million in 1960–61 and £66.4 million in 1961–62. Authorised starts for 1962–63 and 1963–64 are £64 million and £55 million, respectively. The programme for 1964–65 has not been finally settled, but as I informed my hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (Mr. van Straubenzee) on 12th February the value of school projects to be started in that year will be at least £55 million.

Mr. Willey

Does the Minister appreciate that this is a serious cut in school building over the next two years and that we simply cannot justify it by an economic crisis twelve months ago? Will he see that this decision is reversed and the figure at least brought up to that decided in 1958?

Sir E. Boyle

I have already said in answer to an earlier Question that it is too early to forecast precisely the final value of the projects authorised during the five years 1960–61 to 1964–65. No doubt it has not escaped the hon. Member's attention that last year work done on school building reached the figure of £66 million, which was £17 million higher than in the year before?

Mr. Willey

Does not the Minister appreciate that it is precisely because local education authorities were able to do more than he estimated they could do that we ought to be more ambitious about the programme for the next two years?

Sir E. Boyle

The hon. Member must look at the position in the context of educational building as a whole. As he knows, next year there will be a 50 per cent. rise in starts for teacher training, university building is also increasing and we have today a considerably higher level of further education building generally than when the 1958 White Paper was prepared.