§ Mr. George Robertson (Hamilton)I am grateful for this brief opportunity to raise the important matter of the Government's intention to close Callendar Park college of further education and Hamilton college of education and in some way to merge Craiglockhart college of education with some other institution. We have stayed a long time in the House waiting for the opportunity to raise this subject. I am glad to have this brief opportunity to speak, although, as a consequence, my hon. Friends find themselves unable to make the contributions that they had prepared.
My remarks will be concentrated on the inadequate costings of the exercise that the Government have put forward to justify the decision that they have taken about those colleges. I wish to quote the Secretary of State for Scotland, who, speaking in the Scottish Grand Committee on 15 February 1977, said about Craigie college of education, which is in his constituency:
Does anyone feel that it is a reasonable proposition to lose all that I have described the college provides for a saving as small as £187,000 when one thinks of all the benefit to the neighbourhood?"—[Official Report, Scottish Grand Committee, 15 February 1977; c. 42.]At that time the right hon. Gentleman had the advantage of more figures and at least one statistic that the House now does not have.The hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram), after the self-confessed debacle last Tuesday in the Scottish Grand Committee when the Government were humiliatingly defeated by 40 votes to none, tabled a question to the Secretary of State for Scotland asking him
what will be the net effect on the public sector borrowing requirement of the proposed closure of the three collegesfor the three years following closure. Four months after the announcement of the decision and at least a year after the Government must have been engaging in the preliminary exercises, the reply that the hon. Gentleman received was:I shall reply to my hon. Friend as soon as possible."—[Official Report,15 December 1980; Vol. 996, c. 52.]The House and the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South are still as ignorant of the Government's view of the savings to be obtained from the proposed closures as they were a year ago. It is a public disgrace and a disgrace in the House that decisions of this enormity and consequence are being taken without basic and elementary information being made available.The Minister supplied me with figures on 10 November in a long and full answer that showed the unit cost per student for each of the individual colleges of education in Scotland. For the major part of the colleges, the general teaching departments, it demonstrated clearly and distinctly that the unit costs for teaching students is lower in the smaller colleges, in the colleges that the Government intend to close, than in the colleges that they intend to retain. The unit cost per student at Hamilton is £1,340, whereas for the alternative college that the Government are proposing in the West of Scotland—namely, Jordanhill—the unit cost per student in the general teaching department will be £1,760. Student teachers will he transferred from Hamilton college of education to an institution where the unit cost for training them will be greater. The figures that have been produced by the colleges indicate clearly the enormous cost to the 517 public exchequer of the closure of Callendar Park and Hamilton colleges of education. The Government have not yet produced any figures to back up their claims.
There is the vexed question of Craiglockhart college. I ask on behalf of other hon. Members who wished to speak in the debate a couple of specific questions, which I hope the Minister will answer when he replies. First, does the Minister agree that the studies on the implications of a merger are only at the first stage of consultation and do not in themselves give a firm basis for any sort of decision? Will he, therefore, make a clear statement authorising Craiglockhart college to have a normal primary and secondary intake as it is clearly impossible to stick to the original timetable? If the Minister will not say what financial savings will be achieved by merging Craiglockhart, will he explain how much money the Scottish Education Department has saved over the past three to five years through the agreement with the Society of the Sacred Heart whereby it pays 20 per cent. of the total running costs for the upkeep of the building?
These are only a few of the questions that we wished to put. I hope that the Minister will take on board the genuine and deep concern that exists on both sides of the House and throughout Scotland about this issue and come up finally and conclusively with the figures that his Department must have, especially on costs.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Alexander Fletcher.
§ Mr. Dennis Canavan (West Stirlingshire)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Some of us have been up all night, hoping to take part in this debate, which is vital to the future of Scottish education. It appears now that your eye is being caught by the Minister responsible, without our being given the opportunity to contribute from the Back Benches.
The Leader of the House said yesterday that he would be meeting the Secretary of State for Scotland this morning to discuss the matter. Can the Minister tell us what is likely to be on the agenda for the meeting and whether the Secretary of State will make a statement today after he has met his right hon. Friend?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman will understand that I was generous in allowing him to make his point to the Minister under the guise of a point of order. He will also realise that it has long been the custom of the House, probably going back centuries, that the Chair tries to call one hon. Member from each side of the House in turn. One person stood up on the Government side of the House, and it was the Minister.
§ Mr. Tam Dalyell (West Lothian)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am party to an agreement to allow my hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) to put to the Minister questions that some of us—my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr.. Maxton) and others—might have put.
§ Mr. SpeakerI realise the frustration when hon. Members have waited all night. I also understand the hon. Gentleman's point, and I am deeply grateful to him.
§ The Under-Secretart of State for Scotland (Mr. Alexander Fletcher)I am grateful for the points that have been made. I understand the feelings of Opposition 518 Members, but the fact that the debate on one subject took up much of the night has its effect on the debates on other subjects. I shall reply briefly to the points that have been made.
The Government well understand the motivation of the campaigns and the questions that are being put regarding the colleges, their costing and everything else. We have no complaint about that. I can only again ask Labour Members and the staff of the colleges equally to understand that the dramatic reduction in the number of places for student teachers in Scotland is now such that it is uneconomic to try to take a small and decreasing number of teachers—
§ Mr. CanavanThe hon. Gentleman has cut them.
§ Mr. Fletcher—and spread them over the same number of colleges, over 10 colleges. It is in the interests of the teacher-training system in Scotland that we now spread the small number of student teachers over a smaller number of colleges. That is what it is all about.
§ Mr. FletcherI must try to answer the points that have been raised.
Talks are taking place between my Department and Craiglockhart and have been going on for some time. They are taking place on a friendly and satisfactory basis. There is no expectation other than that a suitable and acceptable arrangement for its future will be made.
As for the intake to the three colleges concerned in 1981, the position remains that there will be no new intake. We hope that the students who have not completed their training by next summer will be transferred to other colleges.
The costings depend on the assumptions used. We have said a number of times that the most accurate costings would be those made in consultation with the colleges when we have completed the detailed arrangements.
§ Mr DalyellFudging.
§ Mr. FletcherThere is no fudging in the fact that significant savings will accrue with the arrangements that we have proposed. [HON. MEMBERS: "How much?"] I shall reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, South (Mr. Ancram) on this matter in the usual way, by means of a written answer to his question.
§ Mr. George RobertsonPlanted question.
§ Mr. FletcherThere is a need not to go on producing surplus teachers but to use our education funds for training and further education purposes. There are many young people in Scotland seeking a career who require the best possible service that the education system can provide. Our aim for Hamilton college in particular is to make sure that its resources and facilities are made available for the training of young people.
These points were fully debated in the Scottish Grand Committee last week. I do not believe that any fresh matters have been raised in the debate or that if it had been longer any fresh points would have been made. There has been and there still is a continuing exchange of views on the matter, but there is no question but that in the new year the colleges and the Department will have to get down to making detailed plans for the closures in the best interests of the students, of the staff and of education in Scotland.
§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Michael Jopling)rose in his place and claimed to move, That the Question be now put:—
§ The House proceeded to a Division.
§ Mr. Canavan (seated and covered)On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in order for the closure to be moved at this time of morning when the House is not due to sit again until 2.30? There is ample time before then to discuss this very important matter of the closure of colleges of education in Scotland. The Government are deliberately trying to stifle debate on the subject and come to a precipitate decision on it. I appeal to you to allow the House, even after this Division, further discussion of this important matter, because some of us have been up all night wishing to take part in the debate.
§ Mr. SpeakerI am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for the way in which he has presented his point of order and for observing the normal courtesies of the House when a point of order is raised during a Division. However, the House itself will decide whether the Question will be put. It is now out of my hands.
§ The House having divided Ayes 131, Noes 17.
| Division No. 36] | [9.30 am |
| AYES | |
| Alexander, Richard | Goodhew, Victor |
| Ancram, Michael | Goodlad, Alastair |
| Baker, Nicholas (N Dorset) | Gray, Hamish |
| Benyon, Thomas (A'don) | Greenway, Harry |
| Berry, Hon Anthony | Griffiths, Peter Portsm' th N) |
| Gevan, David Gilroy | Hawksley, Warren |
| Biffen, Rt Hon John | Heddle, John |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Henderson, Barry |
| Blackburn, John | Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael |
| Bottomley, Peter (W'wich W) | Hegg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) |
| Boyson, Sir Rhodes | Hordern, Peter |
| Braine, Sir Bernard | Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey |
| Bright, Graham | Hunt, David (Wirral) |
| Brinton, Tim | Hurt, Hon Douglas |
| Brittan, Leon | Jenkin, Rt Hon Patrick |
| Brocklabank-Fowler, C. | Johnson Smith, Geoffrey |
| Brooke, Hon Peter | Jopling, Rt Hon Michael |
| Brotherton, Michael | Kershaw, Anthony |
| Brown, M. (Brigg and Scun) | King, Rt Hon Tom |
| Bryan, Sir Paul | Lamont, Norman |
| Cadbury, Jocelyn | Langford-Holt, Sir John |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Le Marchant, Spencer |
| Carlisle, Rt Hon M. (R'c'n) | Lester Jim (Beeston) |
| Chalker, Mrs. Lynda | Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) |
| Chapman, Sydney | Luce, Richard |
| Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th,'S'n) | Macfarlane, Neil |
| Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | Macgregor, John |
| Colvin, Michael | McNair-Wilson, M (N'bury) |
| Cope, John | McQuarrie, Albert |
| Dean, Paul (North Somerset) | Major, John |
| Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. | Marshall Michael (Arundel) |
| Dover, Denshore | Marten, Neil (Banbury) |
| Durant, Tony | Mather, Carol |
| Dykes, Hugh | Maude, Rt Hon Sir Angus |
| Elliott, Sir William | Mawby, Ray |
| Emery, Peter | Maxwell-Hyskslop, Robin |
| Eyre, Reginald | Mayhew, Patrick |
| Fairgrieve, Russell | Meyer, Sir Anthony |
| Faith, Mrs Shella | Miller, Hal (B'grove) |
| Farr, John | Matchell, David (Basingstoke) |
| Fell Anthony | Morrison, Hon C. (Davizes) |
| Finsberg, Geoffrey | Myles, David |
| Fletcher, A. (Ed'nb'gh N) | Needham, Richard |
| Fletcher-cooke, Sir Charles | Page, Richard (SW Herts) |
| Fowler, Rt Hon Norman | Parris, Matthew |
| Fox. Marcus | Pawsey, James |
| Fraser, Peter (South Angus) | Percival, Sir Ian |
| Garel-Jones, Tristan | Raison, Timothy |
| Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian | Ress, Peter (Dover and Deal) |
| Rippon, Rt Hon Geoffrey | Van Straubenzee, W.R. |
| Roberts, Wyn (Conway) | Vaughan, Dr Gerard |
| Sainsbury Hon Timothy | Viggers, Peter |
| Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) | Waddington, David |
| Shelton, William (Streadham) | Wainwright, R. (Colne V) |
| Shersby, Michael | Wakeham, John |
| Silvester, Fred | Ward, John |
| Sims, Roger | Watson, John |
| Skeet, T. H. H | Wells, Bowen |
| Speller, Tony | Wickenden, Keith |
| Stanbrook, Ivor | Wiggin, Jerry |
| Steen, Anthony | Winterton, Nicholas |
| Stevens, Martin | Wolfson, Mark |
| Stradling Thomas, J. | Young, Sir George (Acton) |
| Taylor, Teddy (S' end E) | |
| Tebbit, Norman | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Thomas, Rt Hon Peter | Mr. Robert Boscawen and |
| Thompson, Donald | Mr. Tony Newton. |
| NOES | |
| Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (H'wd) | Morris, Rt Hon C. (O'shaw) |
| Callaghan, Jim (Midd't'n & P) | Pavitt, Laurie |
| Canavan, Dennis | Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) |
| Davis, T. (B'ham, Stechf'd) | Sheldon, Rt Hon R. |
| Duffy, A. E. P | Soley, Clive |
| Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) | Spearing, Nigel |
| Hardy, Peter | |
| Heffer, Eric S | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Howells, Geraint | Mr. Bob Cryer and |
| Lambie, David | Mr. John Maxton. |
| Mason, Rt Hon Roy |
§ Question accordingly agreed to.
§ Question, That the Bill be now read a Second time, put accordingly and agreed to.
§ Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House; immediately considered in committee, pursuant to the Order of the House this day.
§ [MR. BRYANT GODMAN IRVINE in the Chair.]