Higher Education (Hansard, 16 June 1981)

§ 3. Dr. Mawhinney
asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he is satisfied that the reduction in resources available for higher education is being shared equitably between universities and polytechnics.

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science (Dr. Rhodes Boyson)
The reduction in resources for higher education in 1981–82 was broadly comparable for the university and non-university sectors. No decisions have yet been taken on the exact apportionment of the resources available to higher education as a whole in 1982–83 and 1983–4.

§ Dr. Mawhinney
I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he accept that the universities' concern about reductions in resources would be increased if they thought that those reductions were being used to undermine their central place in the scheme of higher education?

§ Dr. Boyson
It is important that higher education should be looked at as a unity—on one side the universities and on the other the polytechnics and the maintained sector of higher education. We now have three committees across the binary line investigating student numbers, student costs and teacher training. The intention of those committees is not to undermine universities but to ensure that the money we can afford to spend is used for the most useful purposes possible.

§ Mr. Beith
What is the Government's policy on dealing with the effects of the public expenditure reductions, and the added effect of the policy on overseas students which has damaged many colleges and universities? Does the hon. Gentleman envisage that one or more universities or polytechnics will close or that there will be a widespread lowering of standards—or has he another alternative?

§ Dr. Boyson
The figures available to me on overseas students suggest that, compared with the income on the previous quota system of the Labour Government, there has been only a 1 per cent. decrease in the overall money coming into the universities this year. I can provide those figures for any hon. Gentleman to consider. If they can be proved wrong, fair enough. Those are the figures available.
The hon. Gentleman's other question concerned the use of resources inside universities and the maintained sector. In the university sector, as was shown in a letter from Dr. Parkes on 15 May, there is no intention to close any university; in the maintained sector that decision would have to be taken—I do not think that it will be taken—by the local education authorities.

§ Mr. Ennals
Does the Minister not condemn those local education authorities which have cut concessionary grants halfway through a two-year course, such as an A-level course, so that many of those who have had their grants cut are thrown on to the unemployment queue instead of completing their courses?

§ Dr. Boyson
The right hon. Member has raised an important point. The difference between mandatory and discretionary grants has long been one of the big problems. I trust that at some time it will be sorted out. Like the right hon. Member, I deplore the discretionary grant being given for the first year and being withdrawn in the second or third year of a course.

§ Mr. Henderson
Does my hon. Friend agree that just as important as the distribution of resources is the distribution of functions between the universities and other centres of higher education? Does he accept that, although the functions of universities, as centres of academic excellence, are relatively clear, the functions of other centres of higher education are not so clear?

§ Dr. Boyson
I agree with my hon. Friend. It is sometimes a good thing to go back to first principles to discover what the intentions were when the polytechnics were established. They were certainly not established for 847 pure research. They were intended to produce the people we need in business, management and science. They were intended especially to respond to local demand in industry.

§ Mr. Gordon Wilson
As the Minister is looking at this as a matter of unity, is he not aware of the separate structure of universities and higher education facilities in Scotland, where there are virtually no polytechnics? In those circumstances, will he give his word that Scotland will be considered separately? If not, does he not think that it is inappropriate that he should continue as Minister?

§ Dr. Boyson
If my memory serves me correctly, the polytechnics in Scotland are not directly under this Department but are under the Scottish Education Department. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland is nodding, so I must be correct. One appreciates that. The polytechnics were not established under this Government. Clearly, the hon. Gentleman has raised his question too late.