§ 1. Mr. Edward DaveyWhat discussions his Department has had with the Department for Education and Employment regarding its spending allocations for 1997–98 and 1998–99; and if he will make a statement. [12648]
§ The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Alistair Darling)My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment and I have many discussions with each other. The House will be aware that, as a result of the windfall tax on the privatised utilities, we were able to allocate almost £4 billion to the Department for Education and Employment, including £1.3 billion to refurbish and repair schools. In addition to that, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was able to allocate a further £1 billion for schools spending next year.
§ Mr. DaveyI am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his reply. Does he not accept, however, that because of the difficult overall financial position of local authorities, councils will find it very hard to pass on increases in education spending to schools in full other than by slashing spending on social services? Will he therefore consider either abolishing capping completely, or making minor changes—for instance, introducing a separate and higher cap just for education spending?
§ Mr. DarlingThe hon. Gentleman will no doubt recall that we discussed those matters when I visited his party conference in Eastbourne, but, whatever other effects I had there, my message clearly did not get through to him.
1010 It is necessary for the Government to keep tight control of public spending if we are to achieve the stability that we need for the good of the country's economic future, and if we are to be able to put public spending on a sustainable footing in the future. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor made £1 billion available for front-line teaching next year, from which many local authorities—and, most important, many parents and pupils—will benefit. We make no bones about the fact that the next two years will be very hard, and hard choices will have to be made; but we believe that that is essential if we are to benefit schools in the future.
I should add, for the hon. Gentleman's benefit, that by abolishing the assisted places scheme we have ensured that extra money, over and above the sums to which I have referred, goes into the classrooms where the money counts.
§ Mr. Heathcoat-AmoryWill the Chief Secretary confirm that higher inflation since the general election has cut the value of public expenditure? In particular, he will be aware that written parliamentary answers from his Department show that revenue spending on education and training will be lower this year than was planned by the previous Government. Does he also agree that next year total public expenditure will also be lower than we planned for the same reasons? Given that these have been confirmed in writing by his Department, will the Chief Secretary take this opportunity to confirm both these points about education expenditure this year and general expenditure next year, and will he do it clearly and without evasion?
§ Mr. DarlingI knew that the Tories were now the caring party but it seems that they are now the party of public expenditure, which will come as some news not just to the House but to people outside. Of course I am aware of the parliamentary answer to which the right hon. Gentleman refers because I answered it. Surely he must accept two things. First, he cannot possibly say that the spending totals that have been allocated for this year were inadequate because it was his party that allocated them before it left office. Secondly, inflation has increased because the right hon. Gentleman's colleagues failed to take any action to restrain the inflationary pressures in the economy when they had ample opportunity to do so before the last election. That is the legacy that we all have to live with, and we are tackling it through a number of measures.