asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science which local education authorities have not now declared their intention of changing over to comprehensive education

Seven local education authorities have declined to commit themselves to the completion of comprehensive reorganisation in their areas. These are Bexley, Buckinghamshire, Essex, Kingston, Redbridge, Trafford and Sutton.

I am much obliged to my right hon. Friend for that very comprehensive reply. Is he aware that he has corrected the ill-informed and ill-advised claim of the Opposition that one-third of local education authorities have refused to reorganise their secondary education on comprehensive lines? Will he ensure that his Department puts the utmost pressure on these authorities to see that they bring the benefits of comprehensive education to all pupils in the secondary age group without any more delay?

My predecessor and I between us saw representatives of all seven authorities and asked them to put to their councils the points we made to them. They readily agreed to do this and we are awaiting their replies. While it is true that only seven have declined to commit themselves to the principle of comprehensive reorganisation, there are a number of others which will find it difficult to complete the reorganisation for a number of years.

Why does the Minister, like his predecessor, so dislike excellence in education? Many of the local authorities he has referred to were recently elected on a platform of maintaining these schools. Is he aware that in my part of the world, in South-East London, we have very wide support among all sections of the community?

The hon. Gentleman seeks to prejudge his question. I do not accept that excellence in education is an exclusive characteristic of a particular kind of school. One test of academic excellence is the attainment of high grades in A levels, and these are frequently achieved in comprehensive schools.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that for many pupils the real difference is whether they go to a comprehensive school which was formerly a grammar school or to a comprehensive school which was formerly a secondary modern school? Will he exhort local education authorities to do everything in their power to make sure that the nominal equality of schools is made real?

Certainly. This message has been conveyed to local authorities. Detailed arrangements within a particular area are a matter for the discretion of the local authorities, but unless selection at the age of 11 is ended there will not be any kind of equality of opportunity in education.

Why is the Minister so coy in refraining from correcting the error of his hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, North-East (Mrs. Short)? Is he afraid of her? Why does he not repeat to her the figure he gave me in his letter of 7th July that no fewer that 30 education authorities have made clear that they have no intention of going comprehensive before the end of the decade? Does not this mean that at least one-third of local education authorities are resisting this policy? Will the Minister confirm that they have a perfect legal right to do so?

Far from being afraid of my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, North-East (Mrs. Short) I have the most harmonious relationship with her not only here but also on a number of committees. As to the letter I sent the hon. Gentleman, I thought he might raise this subject and I have brought a copy of the letter with me. Precise as my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, North-East always is, she asked how many authorities had not declared their intention to change over to comprehensive education. The 30 authorities have accepted that they should change over but for a number of reasons, including difficulties about buildings, particularly in rural areas, have not yet been able to put a date on when this will be completed. There is a whole lot of difference between refusing to accept a principle and accepting a principle.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether any plans have been made to ensure that when direct grant schools go independent in 1976, parents of pupils at present at such schools will not have to pay more in fees than they would have done if these schools had maintained their present status.

Yes. This is clear from the Department's letter of 1st May.

Does the Minister accept that it is not very clear to me? Will she please elucidate?

I do not know whether the hon. Lady has had a copy of the letter. If she has, she will have found that it made the situation perfectly clear. We have done our best to explain carefully that in the direct grant schools which have elected to go independent the pupils for whom fees are being paid will not have to pay more than they would have paid had they remained at the direct grant schools. This is carefully spelt cut in the letter. I will send the hon. Member a copy with an explanation if the matter is still unclear to her.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the ending of direct grant schools is likely to increase rather than decrease the inequalities in, educational opportunity unless and until all independent schools are brought within the local authority system?

When we said that we were going to deal with the direct grant schools, we said that we would give them a choice to go independent or come into the maintained sector. I agree that if we are to get rid of selection as such we shall not eliminate inequality in education while the independent sector remains.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps he will take to ensure that the grants. and capitation fees payable to direct grant schools during the phasing-out period retain their real value in the face of inflation.

None.

Will not the hon. Lady and her right hon. Friend take another look at this matter? Do they not realise what has taken place since their predecessors pegged these rates in 1972? Even from April 1973 to May 1975 the cost of living increased by 45·9 per cent. That has completely eroded the grants that are given to these schools. Does the hon. Lady realise that this can only be to the disadvantage of the schools, the staff and the young people involved?

I think the hon. Gentleman is aware that we have taken into account certain areas where grants are payable. As he knows, pupils already in the schools—in particular in the schools which have elected to go independent—will receive grants and will be eligible for fee remission in the way that I have explained previously. As regards the other schools and whatever the truth may be about inflation, given that the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues are constantly talking about a cut-back in public expenditure I would have thought that this was one area in which they would have welcomed a cut-back.

Does my hon. Friend accept that the priority should be to maintain the real value of the capitation allowance within the State system, particularly in view of the fact that the present Government have made sure in real and cash terms that there is a higher rate support grant for that purpose than ever before?

That is obviously right. When talking about a distribution of money that is available for education, one would have hoped to have heard as much talk and as much urging on behalf of the State sector as one hears about grants and increased fees for the direct grant schools.

Will the hon. Lady now answer what she totally failed to answer in response to an earlier question from my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Drake (Miss Fookes)— namely, that in the short term her plans for direct grant schools will dis- criminate against the children of poorer parents and in favour of the children of better-off parents? Is this not totally against her stated policy?

I fail to see that the policy of telling the direct grant schools either to go independent or to go into the State sector discriminates against those who are poorest. They have the whole of the State sector, a sector which offers an excellent education service. If parents are concerned about the standard of education within that sector, the best thing they can do is to get their children into it and improve it.

Will my hon. Friend take positive steps of discrimination to protect the interests of children now being taught in substandard conditions in secondary modern schools, and make every effort she can to move rapidly towards a comprehensive system so that children who are now subject to selection can have a chance of real education which they do not have at present?

My hon. Friend knows that I totally agree with her in that respect.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many representations he received during the month of June 1975 from parents and other interested persons protesting against Government policy towards direct grant schools; and what replies he sent.

About 2,000. The replies have explained that the Government's decision follows from their commitment to end selection for secondary education.

Will the hon. Lady reconsider the answer she gave earlier to the hon. Member for Goole (Dr. Marshall) in which she suggested that because of the interests of social engineering she will consider banning independent education as well as direct grant schools?

I should not like to reconsider my answer—namely, that while there is an independent sector of education the commitment to selection is only a half-truth. This is why we are getting rid of direct grant schools in the way in which they now stand.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that if there were an equally articulate and powerful lobby in regard to education in general rather than on direct grant schools in particular, we might see an increase in the general standard of education, and that as long as the more privileged parents opt to take their children out of the State sector there will be deprivation in education?

I agree with most of my hon. Friend's remarks. I wish to add that it is to be expected that parents whose financial interests will be affected by the Government's decision on direct grant schools will protest about the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he expects to be able to announce a decision on the reintroduction of free school milk for children from eight to 11 years.

I have nothing to add to the reply given to similar Questions by the hon. Members for Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. McCrindle) and Wokingham (Mr. van Straubenzee) on 17th June.—[Vol, 893, c. 1167–8.]

My hon. Friend's answer is unsatisfactory and disappointing. Does he not recall the words used in 1971 by my hon. Friend who is now the Under-Secretary when she led a very impressive and vigorous opposition to the legislation? Are not the words she used then relevant today? Does he not accept that many of the children who are most deprived are those who come from the poorest homes and are the people we are supposed to represent? Does he accept that it is unreasonable to expect children to go a whole day with nothing to drink but water, a situation which would give rise to an immediate walk-out if it happened in a factory or office? Does my right hon. Friend therefore appreciate that my hon. Friends and I would like to see the immediate reintroduction of free school milk?

The immediate reintroduction of free school milk would not be possible because legislation would be necessary, and I am sure it has not escaped my hon. Friend's attention that there is a noticeable shortage of parlia- mentary time. We are not able to anticipate what may be in the next Queen's Speech. Equally, the economic situation means that certain restraints have to be exercised. It is against the background of these problems that we are nevertheless considering what we may be able to do.

Is it still a matter of principle on the Government benches to reintroduce school milk for these children at some time in the future?

I thought that what I said was fairly clear. I said that against the background of the parliamentary and economic situation we were considering what we could do.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he hopes to complete his review of financial assistance to students at the Open University; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he will make a statement on the discussions his Department is having with the Open University concerning increased course fees.

My Department's discussions with the Open University are concerned primarily with the proposal to increase the course tuition fee from the academic year 1976. I hope that these will be completed soon. Financial assistance to students at the Open University is given by local education authorities using their discretionary powers.

Does the Department have any evidence that those in the lower income groups are seriously disadvantaged in attempting to do these university courses?

We have no firm evidence to that effect but quite clearly in considering the position of the Open University I would not wish the fees to push courses beyond the means of any students. We have not yet settled how best to meet that objective, but clearly we need to put up the fees. They represented only some 10 per cent. of the cost in 1973 when they were last increased, and now they represent only 8 per cent. of the cost. I fear that, in line with practically everything else, we have to consider some increases.

Will the Secretary of State ensure that there is no added burden on students of the Open University who are so disabled as to be unable to go to an ordinary university?

It is because of these difficult cases that my noble Friend is having discussions with the Open University to see whether we can find a better way than imposing a pure flat-rate increase across the board.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that an increase in students' fees might mean that more students will take one course instead of one and a half or two courses a year, and that that development might be used by the Open University as an excuse for not increasing the number of new student places, as is threatened for next year? In the discussions with the Open University will he press the importance of taking on 20,000 new students next year and not reducing the number to 16,000, as has been speculated?

I shall certainly convey those views, and certainly we shall want to secure an arrangement which will bring in a little more money without producing the kind of circumstance to which my hon. Friend has drawn attention.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that any increase in the fees for the Open University will mean that people on fixed incomes, such as working-class people and housewives, will have to terminate their studies, and that this will mean that the Open University is no longer an open university? When he says that local authorities have the right to award grants to students, will he bear in mind his Government's cut-back on local authority expenditure which means that many local authorities will not make this subject a priority in their spending?

I do not understand what the hon. Member said about working people on fixed incomes. The rate of increase proposed would be, at the maximum, very much less than the average increase in earnings and other income. As for local authority assistance, in the pre- sent year the rate support grant given to local authorities for education and other purposes is higher than it has ever been.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when he now expects to lay before Parliament the necessary statutory regulations for the abolition of the direct grant.

As soon as possible.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman accept that in the present economic situation there is no possible justification for laying upon local authorities the additional financial burden that would be involved in taking over the direct grant schools? Does he intend to ignore the very strong representation made on this matter to hon. Members in all parts of the House? Is he aware of the grave reservations about the wisdom of his policy which exist among members of the Labour Party throughout the country, a number of whom send their children to direct grant schools? Will he abandon these ridiculous proposals?

I quite understand the very strong opposition which comes from parents and others who are getting substantial benefit from direct grant schools by sending their children to what is virtually independent private education at below the normal cost, an advantage which is conferred only in certain areas. There are only 173 of these schools, and it is by no means certain that the additional cost falling on local education authorities will be substantial, but overall it could well work out that what we save in grant will be sufficient to pay the additional costs. We shall have to see.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if, in order to increase the representation of young people in his present talks with youth organisations, he will invite young staff and volunteers from Young Volunteers of Merseyside.

As I stated in reply to a Question by the hon. Member on 14th May —[Vol. 892, c. 115.]—if the discussions now taking place with youth service interests suggest the need for further consultations, to include other groups of young people, I shall seek to arrange them. These discussions are nearing conclusion, but it is not too late for the young volunteers of Merseyside to submit written evidence.

Is the Minister aware that the nation's youth is anxiously waiting for him as the nation's youth leader-in-chief to make up his mind whether he is to have a youth policy or not, and is he aware that some steps must be taken by the Government to reduce the effects, which are found throughout our society, of negative discrimination against young people?

I am happy to say that I have so long left youth behind as not to nurture the illusions which still possess the hon. Gentleman. It seems that he still thinks himself to be in the position of a youth leader. Perhaps in some senses he is. I assure him in that sense—not in the sense of being myself a youth, except possibly in spirit—that when the Government came to power we found that no preparation had been made for dealing with the problems which beset the youth service. Discussions are taking place with the purpose of enabling the Government to make up their minds in a manner acceptable to youth itself.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the anticipated number of unemployed teachers in September 1975 and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will make a statement about employment prospects for newly-trained teachers.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many teachers qualifying this summer he estimates will be unemployed at the opening of the next school year.

The rate support grant settlement for 1975–76 allowed for continuing improvement in pupil-teacher ratios and took account of this summer's output of trained teachers. While it is too early to have a clear indication, there are signs that some unemployment may arise.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that that is a very serious reply? Does he appreciate that in spite of the generous rate support grant some local education authorities are cutting tack on education expenditure? Does he accept that some teachers are finding difficulty in obtaining jobs? Does he recognise that in areas with very old buildings, such as West Yorkshire, smaller classes are an important element in improving education? Does he not accept that the employment of teachers should have much higher priority than, for example, expenditure on defence and on roads?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of expenditure on education. As he knows, we have done our best to draw to the attention of local authorities the vacancies that now exist for teachers and also to urge them, given that they have been provided with funds, to spend their funds on education. I have no direct plans to intervene either in the employment of teachers or in discussions about the organisation of comprehensive education within local authority areas.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is great concern about this matter in the heavily populated urban areas? Will he confirm that the effect of the cash limits to be imposed either before the House rises or after it has risen will be made clear at the earliest possible moment, so that local authorities with a heavy range of educational problems will know exactly where they stand?

I shall bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman has said about cash limits, but the fact is that for the present year we have provided within the rate support grant sufficient funds, as we saw it after consultation with the local authorities, for the authorities between them to employ all the teachers likely to be available next September.

In view of the problematic employment situation for teachers, and bearing in mind that Wales produces far more teachers per capita than other areas of the United Kingdom, does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would be a good idea to advise pupils in Welsh schools not to go into teaching but to go into other careers where there is a greater chance of obtaining employment in Wales and a greater chance of contributing to the Welsh economy?

I shall get into trouble, not least with the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends, if I seek to give advice direct to Welsh schools, which are the responsibility of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales. However, I shall draw his attention to what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that with class sizes at their present levels it is disastrous to have any teachers unemployed? Will he think again about continuing the policy of the previous administration as regards the training of teachers and reducing the number of college of education places? We desperately need more teachers, not least to bring class levels to the size that we require.

At a time when there is a likelihood of some unemployment of teachers, it is not sensible to ignore the number of intending teachers and the number of teachers as of now. We have to consider the situation in September 1976. It was for that reason that I asked the advisory committee to consider again the proposed number of teachers for September 1976.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman being extraordinarily complacent when he is faced with a teacher unemployment problem in the autumn that is likely to be the gravest since the war? Is he aware that the NUT estimates that there will be 5,000 unemployed teachers? Does he agree that part of the responsibility for this situation rests upon the local authorities which are not taking up their teacher quotas? I know of at least five which are not doing so. Will he tell the House how many local authorities are not taking up their quotas, and will he urge them and the other local authorities to take up their quotas in full? If they are to practise economies, will he urge the authorities to practise them on the kind of extravagances which we read about in this week's Sunday Telegraph?

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for at least getting his figures right. This is the gravest teacher un- employment situation since the war because it is the first time that unemployment among teachers has arisen since the war. Normally we have experienced a period of constant shortage, so I repeat that at least the hon. Gentleman has his facts right. I am encouraged by his suggestion that we should make representations to the local authorities, but he must also understand that his request that I should intervene in these matters is inconsistent with his objection to my seeking to intervene in the reorganisation of schools.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether he will now make a statement on the effects of public expenditure reductions on his Department's capital spending programme.

I hope shortly to announce capital programmes for 1976–77.

I accept that answer from my right hon. Friend but does he appreciate that many local authorities have still not worked out in detail the effects of the last round of public expenditure cuts? Does he now feel able to say something about the effect on his Department's spending of the proposed cash-limits philosophy?

That would be a rather tall order in answer to a supplementary question. The idea of the cash limit is simple—namely, that if local authorities pay wage increases beyond the sum agreed in the voluntary pay policy they will suffer deductions from the rate support grant which they receive in respect of those payments.

In terms of total public expenditure does the Secretary of State expect teachers to obtain the full £6 increase in the coming year? If so, what will be the effect on public expenditure?

I cannot say what the position will be next year. The settlement date next year will not be until 1st April. It will be a matter for negotiation. I would expect the teachers—I may be wrong—to ask for the full £6. We shall have to wait and see.

When my right hon. Friend considers his proposals, will he bear in mind the difficulties already confronting stress areas, particularly areas of grave housing shortage, areas with large immigrant populations and areas where there is a shortage of teachers? Does he appreciate that in some areas children are unable to receive full-time schooling? Will he ensure that such areas receive additional help and that there are no cuts in Newham, Haringey and similar areas?

My hon. Friend knows that in working out allocations allowance has been made for the factors he has mentioned. It is too early to know whether other authorities will require their full quota, but if they do not this should give the opportunity to certain authorities to recruit the necessary additional teachers.

Can the Secretary of State confirm that depite the total cuts he will continue to discriminate positively in favour of deprived urban areas, which on the capital side contain many inadequate schools overdue for replacement or improvement?

I am well aware of these problems. Our policy is to continue to help as far as we can, especially in such areas as the hon. Gentleman has outlined.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps have been taken to establish the Assessment of Performance Unit announced by his predecessor.

I am pleased to be able to tell the hon. Lady that Professor Barry Supple of the University of Sussex has agreed to be the chairman of the consultative committee for this unit. My right hon. Friend will announce the membership of the committee when he has completed his discussions with the interested educational bodies.

I thank the hon. Lady for that reply. Will she give an estimate of the time when the Assessment of Performance Unit will make its first report? The unit is vital if the standards of children are not to fall behind. We earnestly await her answer.

It is impossible for me to say when the unit will make any report because we have not yet completed discussions, but the unit will be set up. It is about to be set up and it is expected that as soon as the membership has been completed it will start work, possibly in the autumn.

Does my hon. Friend agree that certain suggestions concerning annual examinations in regard to basic skills would not be helpful in the present educational system? Will there be encouragement for teachers in certain schools to attempt some assessment of attainment of basic skills whatever the learning methods used in the schools?

Any attempts at assessment can be valuable, as long as they are not undertaken on the basis of set examinations.

Is the hon. Lady aware that nearly six months have passed since her predecessor announced the setting up of this important unit at the suggestion of the Opposition? Will she guarantee that the unit will start work while she is still in her present office?

I am sure the hon. Gentleman will agree that the proposal got off the ground very quickly after I arrived on the scene. I have every reason to suppose that the unit will have started its work before I leave.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he Will pay an early visit to Brentwood.

My right hon. Friend has no plans to do so.

If the Secretary of State or the hon. Lady decides to visit Brentwood, will he or she take the opportunity to visit two excellent direct grant schools in the area and explain to teachers why the Government appear to be hell bent on eliminating two educational institutions which not only cover all social classes but which, by common consent, provide excellent education for all children who attend them?

If I may deal with a hypothetical question in a hypothetical way, if I were to visit Brentwood I should consult the hon. Gentleman, but since we are hell bent on changing the system of direct grant schools they will no longer exist when I make my visit.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether, in the light of the decision of the Hereford and Worcester County Council he will now make a statement on the, future of Shenstone College and the previously approved merger with the Bromsgrove College of Education.

My right hon. Friend has yet to be notified of the county council's decision.

Because the county council's decision, taken last week, offered no recommendation to the Secretary of State, will the hon. Lady now accept that the Government's previous decision should be allowed to stand so that there will be some continuity in Government policies? Will the Government accept responsibility for that decision rather than put the matter on the shoulders of the county council?

We have not yet been notified about what the hon. Gentleman says will be the county council's decision. We must take that matter into account when we are officially informed of these matters. However, I cannot possibly take account of a decision which may or may not exist until we have had an official communication from the county council in question.

Since the hon. Lady appears to be saying that there are no statistics available, even though they appeared the other evening, and since the Government now seem to be shooting the pigeons that deliver the mail from the county councils, is it not time that the Department spent a little more money on gearing up the statistical services so that we may have up-to-date information?

I have no evidence at all that the letter was posted or which stamp it had on it.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what information he collects from local education authorities about the facilities they provide for disabled students; if he is satisfied that all authorities are complying with Section 8 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 in this respect; and if he will make a statement.

It is for local education authorities to decide what provision it is practicable and reasonable to make to enable disabled pupils and students to use the buildings which they maintain. Details of such provision are shown on those plans for new buildings for special schools and other schools and colleges which are submitted to my Department for approval. I am satisfied that authorities have a proper regard for their responsibilities under Section 8 of the Act.

I thank the hon. Lady for that reply, which we have had many times before. What reason does she have for being satisfied? If she were to read Section 8 of the Act she would discover that the word "shall" holds a key position. Will she accept that I know of a number of colleges which claim to have adequate facilities for disabled students but the facilities are totally inadequate and disabled students survive in those institutions only because of certain members of the staff who make heroic efforts to care for them? Therefore, the Act is not being implemented.

Plans for new buildings have, as I have said, to be submitted to my Department and we have to approve them. I do not want to quarrel with the hon. Gentleman about this matter. We are all concerned that disabled pupils should have every possible advantage in education and in educational institutions. If the hon. Gentleman has details of colleges or other establishments which he believes are not fulfilling their obligations under Section 8, I shall be happy to receive them and discuss them with him.

Is the hon. Lady aware that paragraph 3 in Circular 13/70 clearly states that in many new primary schools and extensions to secondary schools provisions for disabled people such as ramped entrances and special toilet entrances for wheelchairs are not being provided? Will she accept responsibility for this?

I have already said that if hon. Members draw my attention to areas where the provisions of the Act are not being implemented—and I do not doubt that hon. Members are concerned about the situation in their constituencies —I shall be pleased to look into the matter and ensure that the machinery for carrying out the spirit of the Act is implemented.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps he is taking to achieve more economical deployment of skilled teaching manpower in the polytechnics.

The initial employment of staff is essentially a matter for the governing body of a college and its grant-aiding authority; and the deployment of staff in post a matter for the institution itself. But it is essential that authorities and polytechnics economise in the use of resources, and I shall continue to promote this objective in every way I can.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is a rather extravagant use of highly-skilled and extremely expensive manpower to tolerate steps in the ratios 1:5 and 1:6, because even the universities are prepared to put up with a ratio of 1:8? Will he look into this problem with a view to making the situation more satisfactory?

I understand my hon. Friend's concern. Some of the difficulties stem from the terms and conditions for staff that were negotiated between the local authority associations and the unions concerned, a matter in which I have no status to intervene. I shall endeavour to find out whether there are any steps we can usefully take in the direction that my hon. Friend has indicated.

In the same way as the Secretary of State's predecessor acknowledged that the cost per unit in a polytechnic was no longer as cheap as it was at a university, as was once thought by the Department, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the strategy that the Department is pursuing? There is great concern that there is no overall plan against which, for example, cuts can be properly formulated. What is the Department's thinking about post-education? Will the Minister set up a Royal Commission to inquire into the matter?

I do not believe that the appointment of a Royal Commission would be the best way of considering all the matters that we are likely to encounter. In relation to the detailed administration of polytechnics, we simply cannot have on the one hand academic independence and on the other freedom of discretion of local authorities if I am expected to intervene even in detailed matters, for example the deployment of staff. Conservative Members must make up their minds whether they want local authorities to have freedom of discretion or not.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that we are short of highly skilled people in industry? If the ratio of students to lecturers is too low in our polytechnics, will he make certain that more places are made availble to students so that eventually we get more scientists and technologists?

I understand my hon. Friend's desire that the polytechnics and technical institutions should train more scientists and technicians. As far as we can, we shall encourage those institutions to do so. At present I am not aware of any great under-utilisation of their facilities.