HC Deb 17 April 1985 vol 77 cc246-7
2. Mr. Kirkwood

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent representations he has received regarding the proposed reduction in funding for the agricultural colleges in Scotland set out in the receent White Paper on public expenditure.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. John MacKay)

Representations have been received from a number of organisations and individuals expressing concern about the proposed reduction in funding.

Mr. Kirkwood

Is this not arguably the Government's most short-sighted public expenditure cut so far? Is the Minister aware that more, not less, advice and research are needed in the present agricultural situation in Scotland? If the industry, and especially small farmers, can satisfy the Government that they cannot raise the £3.4 million cut by 1987, as proposed in the White Paper, will he reconsider the proposal so as to preserve this invaluable service?

Mr. MacKay

I accept that the service is invaluable to the industry, but it is worth pointing out that in 1987–88, when the reductions in public funding are fully effective, about £34 million of public money will still be going to research and development and advisory services in Scotland. That is a very considerable sum.

Mr. Bill Walker

Is my hon. Friend aware that in times of difficulty, when expenditure everywhere is under strain, farmers appreciate that every aspect of agricultural support must be examined, but that they expect continued support for upland and less favoured areas, where it is difficult to provide jobs, rather than for colleges?

Mr. MacKay

My hon. Friend is right about the importance of keeping control of public spending, because farmers are among the groups most directly affected by higher interest rates which may result directly from Governments allowing public expenditure to get out of control. My right hon. and noble Friend the Minister of State is having talks with the Scottish National Farmers Union and the chairman of the Council of Scottish Agricultural Colleges and with college principals to ensure that the service provided is kept in as good a state as possible.

Mr. Donald Stewart

As the EEC has designated Scotland as having 87 per cent. less favoured areas for agricultural purposes, is not the Government's proposal totally backward and reactionary? Will the Minister explain why for 1987–88 the cuts in Scotland will be 41 per cent. compared with only 20 per cent. in England?

Mr. MacKay

The right hon. Gentleman will have to get himself a better calculator. The percentage reduction for Scotland is 41.5 per cent. and the MAFF reduction for England is also 41.5 per cent., so he will have to take the chip off his shoulder about this matter.

Mr. Foulkes

Will the Under-Secretary of State confirm what the Minister of State said in a letter to me — that the grant for Auchincruive college in my constituency is to be reduced by £110,000 in the current year? How does he think that that can be achieved without redundancies? Will he also confirm that the Department has approved the setting up of an organisation, known as the Friends of Auchincruive, to try to raise money for the college through raffles and jumble sales? Is that how education is to be funded under the Tories?

Mr. MacKay

As I recall, the figures given in the letter to which the hon. Gentleman refers showed that spending this year would be greater than in the last year of the Labour Government, so perhaps we are doing better than his right hon. and hon. Friends were doing in 1978–79. We believe that the industry should make some contribution to the services, and we look forward to seeing the extent of that contribution before the colleges work out what savings will have to be made.

Mr. Ewing

Is the Minister aware that it is no surprise to the Opposition that he agreed with his hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) that education was not important? Is he further aware that his answer to the right hon. Member for Western Isles (Mr. Stewart) showed the same abysmal ignorance as the Minister of State has shown about the difference between the position in Scotland and that in England? Has he still not realised that the advisory services in Scotland are closely linked with the educational function, which is not the case in England, and that a 41 per cent. cut in advisory services will thus have a direct impact on education? Is he proud of that?

Mr. MacKay

If the hon. Gentleman reads the record of the exchanges in the past few minutes, he will realise that some of his remarks are quite wide of the truth. There is no reduction in the funding of the colleges' education function, although I concede that, due to the way in which their activities are integrated, there may be a marginal effect on the education facilities, but my right hon. and noble Friend the Minister of State will be considering that aspect with the principals of the colleges and others involved.