§ 10. Dr. Evan Harris (Oxford, West and Abingdon)What representations he has received from higher education bodies and institutions on implementation of the recommendations of the Bett report. [99350]
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mr. Malcolm Wicks)My Department has received several representations from higher education bodies, institutions and individuals. However, I should emphasise that the Bett committee was established by and reported to the higher education employers. It was not a Government committee, and it is for the employers to consider the committee's recommendations.
§ Dr. HarrisIs the Minister aware of the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals' analysis, confirmed by the House of Commons Library, which shows a continued reduction—1.1 per cent. this year, more than last year—in the funding per student per year in higher education? That is projected to continue for the remaining years of this Parliament, despite the income obtained from the discredited and tawdry policy of charging students tuition fees. Students will be paying more and getting less funding per student under this Government. Is the Minister aware that the CVCP does not believe that that can be sustained without damaging the quality of education in universities?
On the Bett report, does the Minister at least accept that he has a responsibility for the fair treatment of women lecturers, who are shown to require additional resources for fair treatment and fair pay?
§ Mr. WicksWe of course support the principle and the practice of fair pay, regardless of gender.
On funding, the policy of tuition fees enables more money—I stress that—to be invested in our universities. The funding of universities by the Government is impressive. In 2001–02, higher education will receive an extra £295 million, compared with the preceding year. That is a cash increase of 5.4 per cent. and comes on top of the £253 million extra the year before, and £318 million the year before that. It is the job of Government and the Department to invest in 427 higher education. It is not our job to set individual pay rates. If we had that power, we would be accused of being control freaks, and we would not want that, would we?
§ Mr. Ian Pearson (Dudley, South)Does my hon. Friend agree that outside our top universities, nobody who is any good lectures full-time in information technology, computer studies, accountancy or law? If such people are any good, they can get two, three, four or more times more money in the commercial world. I urge my hon. Friend to reject categorically the approach of the Bett committee report, which wants the Government to stump up more cash to pay university lecturers more. Will my hon. Friend urge the universities to look instead to the private sector for a solution?
§ Mr. WicksI do not accept the proposition that everyone teaching in those disciplines is second-rate. Many people are motivated to serve in our universities and teach young people because teaching is their vocation. Not everyone is motivated by money. However, there are some problems in some disciplines, and some universities may want to find out whether some employees of accountancy and IT firms want to teach on a part-time basis. That is one possible approach in future in this difficult area.
§ Mrs. Theresa May (Maidenhead)The Government have consistently washed their hands of the Bett report, and the Minister has done so again this morning, but does he not understand that universities are getting fed up with the Government's failure to tackle the issue of university funding?
The Government said—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. Barry Gardiner (Brent, North)Carry on.
§ Mrs. MayI intend to.
The Government said, and the Minister has repeated it this morning, that introducing tuition fees would mean more money for further and higher education, but, under this Government, funding for higher education has gone down by £135 per student—yet another example of the Government saying one thing and doing another. Perhaps, given that, it is little wonder that drop-out rates are rising.
The Government charge tuition fees and then take the money away from the universities by the back door, giving with one hand and taking away with the other. Will the Minister confirm that next year £80 million of tuition fee money will be taken away from the universities? When will he scrap the glitzy press releases and come clean on the Government's failure to deliver on their promises on higher education funding?
§ Mr. WicksI cannot accept any of that. The Government are investing more each and every year in higher education. We grasped the nettle of tuition fees so that more money could be invested. With all due respect to the hon. Lady, she should examine her Administration's record when, between 1989 and 1997, unit funding—[Interruption.] You may not want to hear this, but I shall tell you—not you, Madam Speaker, although you may be interested as well, but the hon. Lady who has a specific interest in this. Between 1989 428 and 1997, unit funding fell by 36 per cent. That was the hon. Lady's record. We are investing more in higher education and maintaining standards.