§ Mr. BlunkettThe Government have allocated, within the spending control totals, an additional £100 million for further education in the coming year, plus the substantial proportion of new deal expenditure on both day-release and in-house training and the full-time education option available to young people from April onwards.
§ Mr. AllanDoes the Secretary of State let the House expect the regional development agencies to have a strategic planning role in the provision of the FE sector and its funding in future? How does he expect the relationship between regional development agencies and the regional committees of the Further Education Funding Council to evolve?
§ Mr. BlunkettYes, I expect there to be a strategic part that regional development agencies can play, both in the planning of further education provision and in terms of the development of meeting skills needs. That is why we appointed Chris Humphries to chair the new skills task force and why it will be working at regional as well as national level. That is why we think that further education has a critical role to play and why "The Learning Age" Green Paper and our consultation will concentrate heavily on sharing with the community as a whole the task of getting it right for the future, so that, instead of snipers and cynics, this country can have a programme that equips the whole nation for the economy of the 21st century.
§ Mr. ChaytorDoes my right hon. Friend agree that a considerable part of the additional £100 million announced at the end of last year was tied into new initiatives for the colleges and planned growth for next 492 year and so did not compensate for the loss to colleges of the cutting of the demand-led element by the previous Government? Does he have plans to ensure that colleges will receive further funds for the 1998–99 financial year?
§ Mr. BlunkettAs I have already said, we have allocated £100 million plus. We cannot compensate automatically for the lost years in which further education was extremely badly treated by the previous Government, with the imposition of enormous productivity gains and changes in unit funding. What I can promise is that the changes in resourcing as a consequence of our changes to funding for further and higher education will ensure that those funds are reinvested, as part of our comprehensive spending review, in lifelong learning as a whole, which includes both further and higher education. The future for further education and lifelong learning is better than any that this country has ever known, and it is our intention to make sure that we get it right.
§ Mr. St. AubynWill the Secretary of State confirm the findings of the House of Commons Library research paper that the Government will take £2.5 billion out of the pockets of students in the next three years under their proposals; that, in order to make it even remotely feasible for students to go to university, the Government will have to lend back £2.25 billion to those students, with the result that virtually none of the money that Dearing identified as being needed will be available to put into higher education? That is all of the burden and none of the benefit.
§ Mr. BlunkettI can see that we need a numeracy as well as a literacy strategy. I have never heard such claptrap in all my life. We are not taking money off students. We are providing the resources that students need and expanding the amount of money and then collecting—[Interruption.] I am being heckled wonderfully, Madam Speaker. If Opposition Members would listen, they might learn a little. The truth of the matter is that students will then, on a progressive basis, repay only at a time when their income allows them to do so. So we are not taking money from students but providing money for students.
Within five years, we shall have raised through our proposals as much as £800 million for reinvestment. I spelt that out on 23 July and I spell it out again now. I hope that Opposition Members can get it right for the future.