University of Glasgow Veterinary School (Hansard, 7 March 1989)

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, the review of veterinary education chaired by Sir Ralph Riley was commissioned by the University Grants Committee. It has been issued for consultation. It will be for the Universities Funding Council, which replaces the UGC on 1st April 1989, to take decisions on the report's recommendations in the light of the comments received.

Lord Campbell of Croy
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his Answer. Does he agree that the cramped accommodation which is occupied at present by the school can be rectified and should not be a reason for removing what is widely regarded as a centre of excellence?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, the review looked for a suitable site in Scotland for a veterinary school with an intake of up to 85 students. It judged that expansion might more easily be achieved at the Bush estate in Edinburgh. Moreover, the report noted the wide range of other relevant research associated with the University of Edinburgh.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that there is—

Noble Lords
Order!

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I am already on my feet.

Noble Lords
Lord Mackie!

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I was up first.

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Belstead)
My Lords, I think for once the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, was a little quicker on his feet.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord the Leader of the House for his sense of fair play. Is the Minister aware that there is a serious shortage of British vets? Is he further aware that there is an increase in the number of vets coming to this country from Europe and that therefore any threat to close either Glasgow or Cambridge veterinary schools can only exacerbate an extremely serious situation?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, I am sure that the noble Lord has a point there. In my last answer I was purely stating the views expressed in the review. That in no way implies that the UFC will either accept or reject those views.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Glasgow veterinary school has 35 acres available for development on a single site? Is he further aware that, with regard to the school being a centre of excellence, it has the largest amount of commissioned research—£15 million worth—of any veterinary school in the United Kingdom? All the evidence points to the fact that the development of Glasgow would be of infinitely more value and probably cheaper than the development of a joint school at Edinburgh.

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord. I am sure that point will be taken into account by the Universities Funding Council.

§ Lord Blease
My Lords, as no university courses in veterinary education are available in Northern Ireland, is the Minister aware of the acute consequences for the 130 Northern Ireland veterinary students competing for places in Great Britain, if this proposed closure of the University of Glasgow veterinary school takes place? Is the Minister further aware that about 30 Northern Ireland students obtain places at the Glasgow University veterinary school which is considered more suitable to the veterinary training needs of Northern Ireland as regards students' travel, financial arrangements and other arrangements? Will the Minister give his earnest attention to this matter?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, I am aware of the numbers quoted by the noble Lord, as he was kind enough to let me have that information earlier today. I shall certainly make sure that the Universities Funding Council takes that matter into account too.

§ Lord Carter
My Lords, is the Minister aware that since 1979 the number of veterinary surgeons in the state veterinary service has gone down by 23 per cent., that the inspection of abattoirs for animal welfare and for hygiene purposes has gone down by 15 per cent., and that we now have a European Community draft regulation which is intended to remove frontier controls on the movement of livestock and meat? All that is likely to increase the demand for veterinary work. With all that in mind, should we not now consider an increase in the supply of veterinary practitioners, as opposed to the closure of the veterinary schools at Glasgow and Cambridge?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, that question is slightly outside the scope of the Question on the Order Paper. I can only repeat that all these matters will be taken into account by the UGC before it makes a decision.

§ Baroness Masham of Ilton
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Glasgow veterinary college carries out some very important work on the AIDS virus and has a worldwide reputation? What will the world think if this very famous school closes?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, there is obviously a consensus of views in the House this afternoon. I am sure that the UFC will read the exchange with great interest.

§ Lord Hunter of Newington
My Lords, will the Minister tell the House what is the difference between the roles of the Universities Funding Council and the University Grants Committee? He said a moment ago that the University Grants Committee was to make the decision. If it is to make the decision it will have to do so on 30th March when it holds its last meeting. What is the role of the new funding council in this matter?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, perhaps I made a mistake. I said in my original Answer that the review was commissioned by the University Grants Committee. The process of consultation is going on at this moment and should be completed by the end of March. It will be for the Universities Funding Council, which replaces the UGC on 1st April, to take a decision on the report's recommendations. No doubt that will be done at the first appropriate moment.

§ Lord John-Mackie
My Lords, was the committee appointed by the UGC because it was short of cash? What was the reason? Does the Minister agree that the phrase, "and the scope for rationalisation", in the committee's remit was asking it to make cuts?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot tell the noble Lord why the Riley Report was commissioned. I do not have that information with me.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, perhaps I may draw the noble Viscount's attention to the wording of the Question, which is to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are examining the matter and 1363 presumably, whether they have any views. He has mentioned many other bodies but has said nothing about the position of Her Majesty's Government. Since it is universally recognised that that particular school is a centre of excellence, are we to assume that Her Majesty's Government have no interest whatsoever in the survival of a centre of excellence?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, the report was not commissioned by the Government but by the University Grants Committee, as I have already said. The Secretary of State for Scotland has made use of the consultation period for making his views known to the chairman of the UGC, Sir Peter SwinnertonDyer, who explained that no conclusions have been reached on the substance of the report. Other of my right honourable friends have also made their views known.

§ Lord Annan
My Lords, is it not a fact that veterinary science departments are the most expensive per student of any in the universities, even including medical schools, and heaven knows that is saying something? Is it not reasonable therefore that two veterinary science departments within 30 miles or so of each other should become a collaborative enterprise? Whether, as the noble Lord, Lord Mackie, perfectly reasonably argues, the centre should be in Glasgow rather than Edinburgh I leave to the judgment of those who know Scotland better than I. Nevertheless, does the noble Viscount agree that such amalgamation is in line with the policy of trying to rationalise expensive departments and that the elimination of the veterinary science school at Cambridge is one example of that?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, whether or not I agree, I believe that it would be unwise of me to make any comment.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, further to the supplementary question of the noble Lord, Lord Annan, is it not the case that the closure of the veterinary schools at Glasgow and at Cambridge would reduce the number of veterinary schools in Britain from six to four? In the present circumstances is it not placing too great a burden of responsibility on the new Universities Funding Council to leave the decision with the council? Should not he and his right honourable friends in the Government decide to take part? In view of 1992 and the single market and all the implications of the Channel Tunnel, is this not a great national issue which is too great for the UFC to decide?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, the noble Lord has a very good point. I have already said that my right honourable friends have taken part and are taking part in the debate. However, it will still be for the UFC to come to a decision in due course.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, with the greatest respect, that is an inadequate and rather contradictory reply. Is the Minister now saying that his right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education, in concert with the Minister of Agriculture, who is also closely concerned with the 1364 matter, will take the decision and that it will not be left to a subsidiary body such as the UFC?

§ Viscount Davidson
No, my Lords. I have said that it will be a decision for the Universities Funding Council having taken into account all the consultation that has been taking place in the past two months, including the exchanges in the House this afternoon.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the noble Lord, Lord Annan, is not correct in assuming that I wanted to concentrate the two Scottish schools in Glasgow? Is he further aware that if one puts two good schools together the result will not necessarily be as good as the original two?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, I do not think that I should act as referee.

§ Lord Harmar-Nicholls
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the questions we have heard imply that the Universities Funding Council is likely to be irresponsible in arriving at its decision? Are there any grounds for implying that?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, I do not know what is behind some of the questions put this afternoon. The Government have complete faith in the ability of the Universities Funding Council to take the right decision after due deliberation.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I do not like to pursue the matter, but the noble Viscount will be aware that it is stated in the education Act that the Universities Funding Council has an advisory role to the Secretary of State. A number of the questions are motivated by the desire of many of us to ask the Secretary of State to fulfil his duty and look after the national interest. Will the Minister convey to his right honourable friend the Secretary of State—and I think that he has already said that he will—that we expect in cases such as this that he will take decisions in the national interest?

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, as the noble Lord said, last year in the course of consideration of the Education Reform Bill your Lordships' House decided that universities throughout Great Britain should be funded through the Universities Funding Council. The Scottish sub-committee of the UGC has been invited to comment on the report. We hope that the Scottish committee of the new council will be given the same opportunity before the council reaches a decision.

§ Baroness Seear
My Lords, is the Minister saying that there is no way in which Parliament is able to question or challenge the decision of the Universities Funding Council? The way in which university education develops is a matter of great concern: surely we have a right to ask questions and receive answers.

§ Viscount Davidson
My Lords, that is exactly what has been happening this afternoon.