§ 4. Mr. Nigel GriffithsTo ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent discussions he has had with vice-principals of universities to discuss their budgetary requirements. [136291]
§ Mr. LangI met the committee of Scottish higher education principals in June 1994. We discussed a number of matters, including the funding of higher education.
§ Mr. GriffithsIs not it a pity that the Secretary of State did not listen to the committee? Does not he realise from the settlement last week that not only are students now driven to poverty but universities and colleges in Scotland find that they cannot make ends meet? Why does not the Secretary of State listen to the distinguished principals of the Scottish institutions and reverse the cuts that he imposed on the vast majority of them last week or tell them where his so-called efficiency savings have come from?
§ Mr. LangThe hon. Gentleman is mistaken. Funding for higher education institutions has been increased by £25 million to £618 million for next year—an increase of 4.2 per cent. What is more, resources available to students through grants and student loans have increased by 19 per cent. in real terms since 1989–90.
§ Mr. StewartDoes my right hon. Friend agree that some 33 per cent. of those in the relevant age group are now in higher education in Scotland compared with some 17 per cent. under the last Labour Government? Does he agree that that has not been at the cost of any drop in quality? For example, the independent teaching assessment placed four Scottish universities—Edinburgh, Glasgow, Strathclyde and, of course, St. Andrews—in the "excellent" category.
§ Mr. LangMy hon. Friend is right on both points. Not only has participation doubled in the relevant age groups since the Government took office but, as he points out, there has been no loss in the quality of the performance of our best universities. No fewer than 30 per cent. of the departments appraised have been categorised as excellent.
§ Mr. WallaceIn the light of what the Secretary of State has just confirmed about the increase in student numbers, will he comment on the remark made by Professor John Arbuthnott, the convener of the committee of Scottish higher education principals? In the aftermath of the announcement last week, he said that this was expansion on the cheap which would further threaten the ability of the institutions to maintain quality. Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to repudiate the suggestion made yesterday by Professor Donald Leach of Queen Margaret college that students should take out loans to pay modest fees for the courses on which they have embarked?
§ Mr. LangHappily, higher education principals are rather more positive and sensible in their attitude to these matters than the hon. Gentleman suggests. As for the funding of students, even the National Union of Students is now looking at more positive and creative ways of achieving better funding for students.
§ Mr. McMasterWill the Secretary of State consider how local enterprise companies could help get the evil 333 drug temazepam off the streets in Renfrewshire? Will the Secretary of State confirm that the local enterprise company could play a role—
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. I wonder whether I am reading the question correctly. It is about the budgetary requirements of universities: we are on Question 4.
§ Mr. McMasterCould the LECs work in tandem with universities to use their research facilities to examine how temazepam could be taken off the streets? It would be of great advantage to the police in their efforts to get the drug off the streets if the Secretary of State made it a schedule 3 rather than a schedule 4 drug.
§ Mr. LangI am sure that the relevant bodies will have heard the hon. Gentleman's subtle, inventive and creative question—perhaps a university or higher education institution should establish a course on the matter.
§ Mrs. FyfeIn this week of science, engineering and technology, will the Secretary of State tell us which of his Government's policies he thinks contributes most to higher education, and particularly to courses that cost more to take but are essential for our economic revival? Could it be the policy of making higher education institutions do more with less money for each student? Could it be the fiasco of the Student Loans Company, which puts more energy into chasing debts than awarding loans? Could it be the Government's recent decision—contrary to that of all previous Governments, both Conservative and Labour—to withdraw the allowance for mature students and to force who knows how many into giving up courses for which they have worked and sacrificed to gain entry? Our students are trying to learn, but when will the Government ever learn?
§ Mr. LangI can assume only that the hon. Lady's question is prompted by embarrassment at the Opposition's lamentable record on higher education when in government, compared with the record that we have achieved in the past 15 years. Perhaps she did not hear me point out that the number of students partaking of higher education has doubled since this Government took office and that the quality of the education that they are obtaining is in many cases excellent; that funding next year is up by 4.2 per cent.; and that there will also be a record number of more than 118,000 places in Scottish institutions next year.