HC Deb 09 December 1980 vol 995 cc768-9
1. Mr Moate

asked the Secretary of State for Employment when he expects to complete his review of the training boards.

The Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. James Prior)

I hope next year to take decisions about the future of individual boards in the light of the findings of the review of the future training needs of each sector of industry, which I have invited the Manpower Services Commission to conduct urgently.

Mr. Moate

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the widespread feeling among a large part of industry that the training boards represent a major burden upon industry and that among all the quangos they are the biggest? When he contemplates his future plans for the boards, will he begin with the assumption that the object must be to reduce the bureaucratic and financial burden that the boards place upon industry without any commensurate results in training?

Mr. Prior

I begin with the assumption that we need to reduce the level of bureaucracy but also that we need to maintain the level of training. I am well aware of my hon. Friend's views. They are frequently expressed to me. I shall certainly examine each individual board, as I suspect the Manpower Services Commission will do also, with a critical eye to the points that my hon. Friend raised.

Mr. Wigley

Does the Secretary of State accept that often manufacturing industry benefits most from the training boards? Does he further accept that it is not unreasonable that manufacturing industry should make a substantial contribution towards the training costs because, at the end of the day, that industry reaps the benefits?

Mr. Prior

Manufacturing industry does make a substantial contribution towards costs. We are considering the costs of the operating expenses of the board which are currently paid by the Government. If the boards are to continue, the operating costs should be paid by industry. That should sharpen the views of industry as to whether they wish the boards to continue in their present form.

Mr. Stokes

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we are glad that he is to examine the individual boards, because they vary both in competence and in the respect that they have for their respective industries? Is he further aware that the best boards could survive by charging fees that industry would be glad to pay and that the others should be abolished as soon as possible?

Mr. Prior

All those points will be taken into account during the course of the review. It would be wrong for me to try in any way to prejudge the findings of the review. The Manpower Services Commission will get on with the matter. It must report by the middle of June. We shall then take fairly quick decisions, taking account of the points mentioned by my hon. Friend.

Mr. Harold Walker

What is the total amount that the secretary of State is proposing to withdraw from the boards? How much will be the additional burden imposed on industry as a consequence of his proposals? How many fewer training places will there be in industry? When will we have a full, detailed statement about these matters so that we can better understand the legislation that will be introduced?

Mr. Prior

Legislation will be brought before the House in due course. There is no reason why it should have any effect on the number being trained. We are looking for training to a more fruitful end than some of the present training and expenditure. The operating costs of the training boards, which are paid for by the Manpower Services Commission through Government grant, amount to £40 million or £50 million. On this year's adjusted basis it is about £40 million.