HC Deb 21 March 1963 vol 674 cc555-8
25. Mr. Longden

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is satisfied that the recurrent grant so far awarded will enable the universities to expand sufficiently to cope with the increased demand for places in 1966 and thereafter; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

No recurrent grants have been announced for the period after 1966–67 which falls in the next quinquennium. On the position up to 1966, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary gave to his Question of 12th February and point out that the Government have undertaken to review the level of recurrent grant within two years from March 1962, in the light of expansion achieved and all other relevant factors.

Mr. Longden

Does my right hon. Friend know whether the Chancellor of the University of Oxford, to whom I originally put down this Question, agrees or disagrees with the unanimous opinion of the University Grants Committee, the Vice-Chancellors and Principals Committee and the Association of University Teachers that the 1966 target cannot possibly be achieved on the present grant? Is he aware that it is of the utmost urgency that he should new announce the recurrent grant for 1963–64 without waiting for Robbins?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I agree with my hon. Friend that the Report of the Robbins Committee, important though it is, is not necessarily decisive in this regard. My hon. Friend will himself be aware that some of the statements to which he has referred were made before the various announcements of expansion, such as the one I made to Parliament earlier this week, in respect of the Government's programme for universities.

Mr. Swingler

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it quite clear that the Government's own target for 1966 does not provide for any increased proportion of university students?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

If the hon. Gentleman takes the separate year 1966 by itself— which is, of course, the peak year of the post-war bulge—he is very nearly right, but if he takes any other year before or after that he will find the proportion rising.

Mr. Swingler

Does not the right hon. Gentleman remember that on 24th January he gave me figures that showed a fractional decrease from 1962 to 1966 in the percentage of university students in relation to the age group?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

Apart from 1966, the general tendency is upward even when one confines it to university students, but as I made clear in the Answer to which the hon. Gentleman refers, higher education generally, particularly as a result of the big expansion in the colleges of advanced technology, shows an overall improved proportion.

27. Mr. Swingler

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to what extent, in fixing the current level of university grants, he took account of the fact that the present rate of university expansion will not increase the proportion of the relevant age group able to take advantage of university education.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

The hon. Member is in error. The present planned rate of university expansion will in fact provide for a higher proportion of the relevant age groups to receive a university education in the next four years of this quinquennium than in the current one. Once the peak of the postwar bulge in the birth rate in 1966–67 is past, planning is for expansion which will further improve this proportion. The main consideration governing the decision last March was the capacity of the universities to expand without loss of standards. The hon. Member will no doubt he aware that during the present quinquennium, current plans provide for an increase in student numbers of 35 per cent. above 1961–62 at universities, and that this is supported by a planned increase of 75 per cent. in students in other institutions providing higher education. This is far the biggest expansion in higher education that this country has ever known.

Mr. Swingler

Will the Minister look again at column 258 of the OFFICIAL REPORT of 24th January, where he told me that in 1962–63 the proportion of the age group able to get university education was 4.59 per cent. and that in 1966–67 it would be 4.57 per cent.—a fractional decrease in the proportion of the age group able to get university education?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

That Answer, which I have very much in mind, does not in any way invalidate what I have just said about the upward tendency, with the sole exception of 1966–67.

31. Mr. George Craddock

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he expects the clearing house arrangements for applicants to enter universities to be sufficiently advanced to enable him to state the number of qualified students who are unable to obtain university places.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

These arrangements are run by the universities themselves and applications in respect of the universities taking part in them are now being put through the Central Office for Admissions for the academic year beginning next October. While these arrangements will certainly give us better figures on the demand for university places than we have now, I do not think they will produce a complete answer to the hon. Member's Question, since, on the one hand, not all applicants will reach the standard acceptable to universities, and, on the other, some applicants will gain admission in subsequent years.

Mr. Craddock

Is the right hon. Gentleman unaware that many of these young people who have passed their entrance examination to universities come to see Members of Parliament and deplore the fact that they cannot obtain a place? Surely to goodness the Government have a responsibility to see that the buildings are expanded and new universities are built so that these men can have the places. Would not this be of great benefit to British society later on?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

As for the first part of the supplementary question, I said in reply to an earlier question that we are seeing the development of the biggest increase in universities which this country has ever seen. The allocation of places to individuals has always been thought rightly to be a matter not for the Government but for the universities themselves. I very much hope that their admirable proposal for a central office for admissions, with which most but not all the universities are cooperating, will help to see that placing is carried out perhaps more effectively than it has been in the past.

Mr. Albu

Has the right hon. Gentleman not seen the estimates made recently in the newspapers by some university staff members showing that about 50 per cent. of fully qualified men and women applicants are failing to find places in the universities?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I have seen all sorts of figures bandied about. They turn to some extent on how one defines "fully qualified" and whether one is concerned with entry in a particular year or over an extended period.