asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what consultations she has had concerning the administration of education under the Local Government Act 1972.

My Department consulted the associations of local authorities and the staff interests chiefly involved before the issue of circulars Nos. 1/73 and 8/73.

The Act contains no provisions to decentralise the administration of the education services. In those circumstances, is the right hon. Lady aware that the advisory committees, with or without an officer, that are recommended in one of the circulars she men- tioned—circular 1/73—are utterly useless? She will get no responsible people to serve on such committees when they realise that they have no powers. By the same token the Minister might tell us what became of the extra powers that were talked about for managers and governors. The local touch in this most personal of services has been lost under the Act. What does the Secretary of State propose to do about it?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is trying to go back on an Act that has already passed through the House. I do not agree with him that people will not serve on advisory committees because they have no executive authority. We find no shortage of people to sit on them and no shortage of recommendations to set them up.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what proportion of the spending on educational priority areas is in the Northern Region: and how this compares with other regions.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how expenditure on education priority areas in the Northern Region compares with that in other regions.

Educational priority areas have not been designated as such. The sum of £7·9 million has been approved for educational projects in England under the urban programme and £1·25 million or 16 per cent. of that total has been allocated to the Northern Region where the pupils in maintained primary and secondary schools represent 7·7 per cent. of all pupils in such schools.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the total spending on positive discrimination as such nationwide cannot be more than about £10 million in a year? The Government have just given mortgage borrowers £15 million for three months. Does not that show that educational priority is a sham? When will the Minister put real resources behind the programme?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is criticising his own Government for the smallness of their assistance. I have carried out precisely the urban programme for the education services in conjunction with the Home Office. As to the regional figures, the Northern Region has had a fairly big share of the available money.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that the North is an area of exceptional need, as shown by the fact that, according to recent statistics, over 50 per cent. of school leavers there left without a pass grade in any national examination? Does she realise that educational progress in the North, as elsewhere, is being held up by the unrealistic cost yardstick applied by her Department?

The cost yardstick does not, I think, come under the urban programme but comes under the capital school building programme. If the hon. Gentleman looks at all the figures in the whole table, he will find that the Northern Region, in receiving 16 per cent. of the money while having only 7·7 per cent. of the pupils, did as well as, if not better than, any other region.

In her main answer the right hon. Lady said that educational priority areas have not been designated as such. I urge her again to consider setting objective criteria for determining such areas. How can we ever measure that the right amount of resources is going into educational priority when we do not know which areas should be helped in this way?

I repeat that no educational priority areas have ever been designated, but schools of particular difficulty have been designated. There are nearly 600 such schools. It was thought that that was the best way to tackle the problem.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will seek to pay an official visit to the United Slates of America.

I have no plans to do so at present.

That is a disappointing answer. Will the right hon. Lady get her Department to examine the relationship of United States technological universities to the petroleum industry, with particular regard to how they are using the spin-off from the space programme, linking it to underwater research and the production of petroleum?

I expected that the hon. Gentleman would ask a supplementary question about the petroleum industry. The United States having had an offshore industry for a good deal longer than we have, it is not surprising that it has many more extensive facilities for education and training. We have about six universities with relevant courses and a number of further education establishments which offer relevant training.

Even if my right hon. Friend is not immediately visiting America, will she, in observing the American scene, see whether this country has anything to learn from American experience and its successes and failures in such matters as the maintenance of students in universities, the difficulties of comprehensive schools in poor neighbourhoods and the right of free education to exist alongside State education?

I am always willing to learn from the educational system of any country. I would add one more matter to my hon. Friend's list—the close cooperation between industry and the universities in that country. I agree with him in his list.

If the right hon. Lady should decide to visit America, will she view British art treasures in the great American public galleries which have been bought with tax advantages to their donors? Does she accept that many more works of art of British national and historic importance are likely to leave these shores as a direct result of the fiscal Philistinism of VAT which discriminates against native buyers?

I have already seen and enjoyed very much some of the treasures in the art galleries of the United States. The hon. Gentleman's supplementary question should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will issue a progress report on discussions between her Department, the University Grants Committee and universities concerned with implementing the recommendations of the Internal Management and Engineering Group report.

My Department and the UGC are still examining with other interested Departments whether further specialist courses are required to meet the needs of the industries concerned.

There does not seem to be a great deal of urgency in that answer. Is the Minister aware that, if we are to cut back the American lead which she acknowledged in reply to the previous Question, it is extremely important that we in this country should take quick action? The IMEG report makes certain recommendations for the establishment of a working party and draws particular attention to the absence of even one chain of petroleum engineering. Will the Minister pursue all these points with urgency, because a Government lead is required?

There are six universities which have chairs relevant to the petroleum industry. Courses are available in further education establishments in drilling techniques and exploration methods. Before we decide to take more action we should decide precisely what action to take, because it needs not only to be more but to be appropriate.

Is not the lack of highly-trained experts a reflection on the failure of our educational system to look forward to the country's requirements a number of years ahead? Is there not a case for manpower planning with a long forward look?

If manpower planning had been expert enough to tell us precisely what was required, the education services would have responded and produced the people. As it is there are six universities with chairs in subjects relevant to this industry, and we are still considering precisely what new specialist facilities are required. It is not a general "more" that we want, but particular courses in particular areas.

Does not the right hon. Lady agree that Professor Ridell said in his report that, if the oil drilling business in the North Sea is to go to British and not to American subcontractors, we must take steps to ensure that there is an adequate body of British trained oil drilling engineers? What has the right hon. Lady done about achieving this body of personnel since the report was published? If she has not done anything, when will she be in a position to allocate Government resources and Government money and take Government action?

The report was pub lished comparatively recently, and we are considering with the Department of Trade and Industry and the Scottish Office exactly how to tackle the problem. In the meantime, from what the hon. Gentleman says one would think that nothing was taking place in British universities but there are relevant chairs in Aberdeen, Heriot-Watt, University College, London, Manchester and Liverpool Universities, Imperial College and Glasgow University.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she is satisfied with the arrangements for the dates during the academic year when children may leave school; and if she will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. I am satisfied with the present arrangements.

As there are three terms in the academic year, could not there be three leaving dates? May I draw to my right hon. Friend's attention the children whose sixteenth birthday falls in the early part of September 1973 and who have been offered a job on 1st January but cannot take it up because they cannot leave school until Easter 1974?

Yes, there are particular hard cases which would have occurred almost wherever we had set the date for school leaving. It is a problem and very hard luck on those who fall just on the wrong side of the line. It would be unwise to return to having three school leaving dates because it would be difficult to arrange a relevant curriculum for just one term, and a great deal of the good work done by raising the school leaving age would be undone.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will issue advice to local education authorities that further education classes for the deaf to learn to lip-read need not conform to the minimum number required for other subjects; and that for the most effective results no lip-reading class should have more than eight students.

I do not think advice is necessary. Local education authorities can provide classes for small numbers if local circumstances permit.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, although they can, they do not? The largest cities are applying arbitrary figures which do not permit the decent teaching of lip-reading. As this is a very neglected area, will the hon. Gentleman reconsider his answer and set up a departmental inquiry? It is a disgrace to civilisation that we are not doing more in this field.

I share the hon. Gentleman's concern about this subject, but in fact local education authorities are more sympathetic than perhaps he allows. In reply to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, my Department, in consultation with the Department of Health and Social Security, is working on an inquiry to find out the extent, actual or intended, of local education authority provision of classes in lip-reading. When we have this information it will be publicised by the Royal National Institute for the Deaf and through other suitable channels.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what has been the increase in the cost of living since the last increase was made in the London teachers' allowance.

London allowance is not calculated on the basis of the retail price index, which has risen by 20·2 per cent. It is calculated on the differential between the cost of living in London and elsewhere, using a special index devised in 1967.

Is not the Minister aware that, however it may be calculated, there has been an extremely large increase in the cost of living since the London teachers' allowance was last increased? Against that background, the offer of £15 a year to London teachers is derisory. For how much longer are we to see teachers generally and young teachers especially leaving London schools before the Minister faces the seriousness of the problem and allows free negotiation on the merits of the London teachers' allowance?

The retail price index is taken into account in the ordinary pay negotiations of the teachers as it affects the whole country. From 1st November 1970 there have been two salary awards, a 10·8 per cent. increase overall from 1st April 1971 followed by a 9·6 per cent. overall increase on 1st April 1972. The London allowance is based on the differential between the increased cost of living in London and elsewhere, and it is on that basis that the formula resulted in the £15 increase, which is in fact a 12 per cent. increase.

Will my right hon. Friend ask the Burnham Committee to consider special allowances for teachers in the Home Counties who find the extra cost of housing difficult to bear on a teacher's salary?

The extra cost in the Home Counties comes in on the other side of the equation in a reduced differential between the cost of living elsewhere and in London. It would be open to the Burnham Committee to make such a recommendation if it wished.

Will the Secretary of State come back to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Wands-worth, Central (Mr. Thomas Cox) and give us an insight into her intentions about the position facing the Inner London Education Authority because of the difficulties of young teachers in finding accommodation in inner London at rents they can afford?

Some of the London areas either provide travelling allowances or make special arrangements for the allocation of council houses for their teachers. It is a matter for them. This is a problem that concerns not only teachers but a number of other people.

Will my right hon. Friend carry out negotiations with those London boroughs like the London borough of Lewisham which are extremely unhelpful in providing housing for teachers? The position is made more difficult when they are running a campaign to reduce the number of houses for sale, even if teachers could afford to buy them.

I am sure that the London borough of Lewisham will take account of the point made by my hon. Friend and I will make certain inquiries.

The Secretary of State has told the House of the traditional criteria for determining teachers' salary increases. Have not the Government laid before the House an order to make sure that those traditional criteria are subsumed by their policies concerning pay increases?

No. The hon. Gentleman referred to traditional criteria for pay increases. The criteria to which I think he refers in the context of the Question relate to the London allowance, and it would be a matter for the Burnham Committee, if it wished, to take those as continuing. How they are to be dealt with against the global sum is again a matter for the Burnham Committee.

The Secretary of State must begin to answer at least some of the questions. May I put this question to her again? Is there not an order now laid before the House in the Government's name to make sure that if the normal criteria for London or anywhere else are agreed by Burnham, that shall be overruled by the requirements of the Government's pay policy?

The London allowance is part of the global sum. It would not be open to the Burnham Committee or any other committee to come to a total settlement in excess of the global sum.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when she last met a deputation from the National Union of Teachers on the subject of the future size of the teaching profession; and if she will make a statement.

On 2nd April 1973. I have nothing to add to the statement made by my hon. Friend in the debate on 4th April.

Is the Secretary of State aware that some of the pet figures given by her hon. Friend were not available to the deputation which she saw two days previously? Is she also aware that the hon. Gentleman said that she would provide any figures that she considered necessary? Does she not consider that she ought to supply the expected numbers of teachers who will leave the profession and the projections of pupils becoming 16-plus between now and 1981? Will she also provide the range of expectation? Surely these figures are required to prove her target figure of 510,000.

My hon. Friend gave a great number of figures to the House in reply to the hon. Gentleman's Adjournment debate on 4th April. I am now attempting to set up a national advisory committee on the supply and training of teachers which I expect will go further into these figures.

Will the Secretary of State tell the House how areas in the urban aid programme are to set about reducing class sizes in the next decade if the teacher supply is not stepped up beyond the forecasts in her White Paper?

The teacher supply is being increased very considerably. I fail to see how going from 385,000 to 510,000 in a decade is not substantially increasing teacher supply.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what proportion of polytechnic resources are being devoted to research.

Complete information on the research expenditure of polytechnics is not available in the Department. About 4 per cent. of their total expenditure in 1970–71 was for scientific research.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would be helpful if there were more information on this matter? Does she also agree that there is a need for a radical reappraisal of the hitherto limited role allocated to research in polytechnics?

On the whole, polytechnics are meant to be centres of teaching rather than of research, with sufficient research to carry out the teaching function in the best possible way. I cannot give complete figures because of the way that polytechnics are financed. As my hon. Friend knows, Committees of this House have had certain comments to make about them.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what action she intends to take following publication of the Russell Committee report on adult education.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what action she proposes following the publication of the Russell Committee report on adult education.

My right hon. Friend is studying the report which was published a fortnight ago. She will in due course be consulting those organisations which have a special interest in adult education.

While all of us would hope to see the maximum numbers possible involved in adult education, may I ask what evidence there is of long-term Government planning to ensure that people's expectations are met regarding employment and what evidence there is that the jobs for which they are qualified will be available?

That is hardly a matter that comes within the province of my Department, but the Government's foresight regarding adult education is shown by the importance which we attach to this report.

In view of the general criticism that the report is modest, may I ask whether the Minister can find it in himself to give the merest hint of the likelihood of a strong positive lead in due course by his Department?

I recognise the hon. Gentleman's interest, but he must be reasonable. The report has been published for only a fortnight and it has taken four years to prepare. I think that we must be given reasonable time to study its implications.

In the light of the report, may I ask my hon. Friend to give some indication of his attitude to the Open University which is a major influence in the whole sphere of adult education and has done extremely good pioneering work? Will he say whether the Government feel that the multi-media approach and the credit system of assessment over the fairly long period in which adults are engaged in study are useful contributions in this area?

I have always thought that the Open University was making a most important contribution to education. I was glad when it was founded and pleased to go with my right hon. Friend to pay an official visit there a few weeks ago.

My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) has exposed the White Paper as a complete "con" trick on the public as there is no provision in it for adult education. If the Russell Report is to be implemented, surely the White Paper must be rewritten?

I believe that the White Paper on Education will count as one of the seminal educational documents to be published and will be remembered long after the inaccurate comments by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Spark-brook (Mr. Hattersley) have been forgotten. The adult education programme was not considered in the White Paper because it was the subject of a separate report.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she is satisfied with the availability of teachers for deaf children; and if she will make a statement.

I will, with permission, answer this Question—I am sorry, it is for my hon. Friend to answer.

It merely shows the zeal of the Department.

Has my hon. Friend's attention been drawn to a recent report which said that teachers were leaving schools for deaf children twice as fast as they could be replaced and that it was not unusual for a child to wait two years for entry into a special school? As this is a particularly debilitating complaint for a child, may I ask my hon. Friend to show some of the zeal to which he has just referred by doing his best to recruit additional teachers in this sector?

I am familiar with the Press reports to which my hon. Friend has referred. Those reports about the teaching situation in schools for deaf children have been greatly exaggerated. For example, the report that nearly one-third of the teachers did not hold the necessary qualification was completely misleading. The matter is being thoroughly investigated within my Department. We have already had two meetings with specialists and a third is in prospect. We hope to reach a conclusion on this important subject before the end of the year.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will make a statement on her visit to South Africa.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will make a statement about her recent official visit to South Africa.

I attended the inauguration of a new observing station for the South African Astronomical Observatory as the Minister responsible for the Science Research Council which is a partner in the observatory with the South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research.

Does the right hon. Lady feel no responsibility as the guardian of all the finest traditions of liberal education? Why did she not take the opportunity, whilst in South Africa, to make it absolutely clear beyond doubt that the British people and Government are fundamentally opposed to the persecution of students and academics in South Africa and anywhere else in the world?

At my original conference I made very clear indeed the Government's views on apartheid and how we view the role of students.

Did the right hon. Lady feel moved to say anything about the case of John Hosey from Coventry, about which I sent her a telegram? Does not she realise that he has already been imprisoned without trial for six months and that he could face a sentence of at least five years' imprisonment if he were convicted under the Terrorism Act when his only crime was handing out leaflets?

The hon. Gentleman sent me a telegram and I sent him a reply. The person to whom he refers is a citizen of the Irish Republic, and as such I felt that I had no locus.

If the Secretary of State is not prepared to make a protest, will she at least consider that the South African Government are depriving Africans of education, and black Africans in particular? Will she give thought to the possibility of offering places at higher institutions of learning in this country to black African students who are debarred by the Government of their country from access to technical education in their own country?

While I was in South Africa I visited two educational establishments. I visited the Oral Learning Centre School in Cape Town for disadvantaged children in the coloured part of Cape Town, and the University of the Western Cape, which is a university for coloured people.

While we deplore much that happens in South Africa, is not the last question a little misjudged? Is it not a fact, and should not the fact have been brought out, that the educational provision for black Africans in South Africa is better than in any other State in the African continent?

Rubbish.

With respect, I do not think that is a question for which I am responsible. I visited the Oral Learning School.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she can yet announce the findings of her working party on school transport.

No, Sir.

While obviously the work of the working party should be thorough and in the end right rather than quick, may I ask whether we can hope for a quick decision on this matter before the new school year starts? If a decision is made we will not have the upheaval which we had at the beginning of the present school year, which was caused because parents could not understand the nonsense.

I doubt whether any decision will come in time for the new school year. I understand that the working party is coming up against the difficulty that it is taking longer than it had thought to get from all the local authorities the necessary factual information about their transport practice. Most of the information has now been received, and the working party has recently heard oral statements of evidence from the representatives of nine remaining organisations. I still doubt whether the result will be out before the end of the next school year.

Will the right hon. Lady publish the names of the authorities which have been so slow in producing the facts?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman is being a little critical of the authorities. They have on their hands a complete local government reorganisa- tion as well as many of the demands which we are now making upon them. It would be better if we took that factor into account.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps she is proposing to take to help greater London boroughs which are losing young teachers because of the high cost of living in London.

First, we need to establish the facts about the rate of turnover in London and elsewhere and, as far as possible, the reasons for it. I am considering setting up a sample survey covering the whole country.

Why did the Government insist before the recent Burnham negotiations that the London teachers' allowance must be considered as part of the global sum when that has not traditionally been the case? As nothing is likely to be done about an effective increase in the London teachers' allowance, is not the right hon. Lady aware that in educationally and socially deprived areas such as mine in Waltham-stow, and in many other parts of London, the educational system will gradually be run to a halt, to the detriment of the interests of working-class children in those areas?

The London allowance was treated by virtue of the White Paper in the same way as any other sums which are counted as remuneration. It fell under that particular head.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that without any working party it is fairly clear that the cost of housing in London makes it difficult for teachers to live in the area in which they teach? Many local authorities do not do much about this. Because of the difficulty for teachers, does my right hon. Friend propose to consult her right hon. Friends and to ensure that local authorities do their utmost to help in the provision of housing for teachers?

That consultation has already taken place. I said in reply to my hon. Friend's last question, although I do not think he heard it, that I would make inquiries from his authority.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that Mr. Aubrey Jones' Prices and Incomes Board specifically ruled that London weighting for teachers would not and should not be part of the global sum? That is why teachers in London feel that the right hon. Lady is cheating them. In consequence there is great bitterness. It has been put to me by many teachers in London "If you want to get on in teaching, get out of London". Is not that a serious condemnation of the right hon. Lady's attitude towards the problem?

The counter-inflation policy and the pay and prices legislation have already passed through the House. The Inner London Education Authority still has one of the best pupil/teacher ratios in the country.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what advice she has received from the University Grants Committee on financial resources available for universities of technology.

Before my right hon. Friend settled the total grants for the 1972–77 quinquennium the University Grants Committee gave her its confidential advice on the whole range of university development. The UGC decides the individual allocations.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that the finance allocated, for example, to offshore engineering technology is ridiculously inadequate? Are not the Government shamed when they find that a distinguished draper gave £180,000 to the Heriot-Watt University to assist it in its offshore engineering technology? Have the Government no statement to make? Should not the Government apologise to the House for treating such a serious position in so niggardly a fashion?

I do not think there is anything to apologise for when recurrent and equipment grants under the quinquennium will total £1,790 million. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the Heriot-Watt University. That university has benefited by a raising of the recurrent grant, which is to increase by 65 per cent. from £1·87 million to £3·09 million. It is perfectly acceptable that such major provisions should be supplemented from private sources.

Will my hon. Friend assure the House that the great technological developments evident off the shore of Scotland are reflected in the grants which were probably evolved, developed and calculated long before the extent of North Sea natural gas was fully evident to my hon. Friend's Department and to the University Grants Committee? Has the sum of money for the Heriot-Watt University, for example, been beamed specially towards North Sea exploration and development?

That must be a matter for the university to decide. For specific research projects any university, including Heriot-Watt, can apply to the research council. It is also wholly justifiable for Heriot-Watt to see what help it can get from the petroleum industry. Heriot-Watt is establishing an institute of offshore engineering, thanks to the generosity of the Wolfson Foundation.

Are the Government prepared to match Wolfson's £170,000?

As I have already said, we have made grants to Heriot-Watt which are very much in excess of the grant from the Wolfson Foundation.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what progress she has made in her consideration of representations submitted to her on student maintenance grants; and if she will now make a further statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will now make a further statement on the National Union of Students' claim for increases in maintenance grants.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will now make a further statement on her consideration of representations made to her on student maintenance grants.

I have no statement to make at present.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that such a casual reply to such an important question will be viewed with grave dismay by the universities? Is she further aware that from vice-chancellors downwards all staff, as well as the students, now realise that the poverty level of students' grants and ever-increasing prices are having a grievous effect on their desire to study and a deleterious effect throughout our universities? Will the right hon. Lady consider the matter?

I do not accept the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question. There will be a small increase in September, because this is the last year of the triennium and, therefore, we have about a 4½ per cent. increase still to come. I am still considering the matter further, but I have no statement to make today.

I realise that the very mention of students immediately raises the blood pressure of many of the Secretary of State's right hon. and hon. Friends, so I appreciate some of her difficulties. Will she say whether it is true that local education authorities are picking up more by way of parental contributions than her Department budgeted for when fixing the present level of student grants? Does not the right hon. Lady consider that that fact and the fact mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Molloy) provide sufficient grounds for her to review and increase the present level of grants?

I cannot accept the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question. In view of what the present Government have done to help to increase the number of people attending universities and to increase the polytechnic and further education building programmes, I scarcely think that it could be said that they were anything other than in great favour of students. The other point, about parental contribution, is one upon which I have received representations, and these are being considered along with the point about the increase in grants.

As the National Union of Students has now taken as part of its settled policy the making of non-advanced work in further education a subject for mandatory awards, will my right hon. Friend give an indication of what the cost might be?

It would be very difficult to tell, but I do not think there is any question of making every award mandatory along the lines which, I understand from reports, the National Union of Students required. There are two different points: one is about making all awards mandatory; the other is about making awards for certain courses equal to mandatory awards. They are rather different.

Regarding the examination which she is to make of this matter, will the right hon. Lady say whether she will do away with the terrible discrimination against married women students, and in particular the younger married women students, who are subject to two means tests, first on the husband's possible income and, secondly, on the parents' possible income? Is not this particular form of discrimination grossly unfair and will not it encourage people to live in sin?

The question of the grant for the married woman student is a matter for the next triennium. We are now coming to the last year of the present triennium. The hon. Gentleman is wrong perhaps about many things, but about one thing certainly. The married woman student whose husband is not a student does not have his income means-tested.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, although many students have totally alienated themselves from public sympathy by their behaviour, there are many decent students who are getting seriously into debt and that this is really hindering their studies when they are anxious to do well at university?

I agree with my hon. Friend that we should not judge the great body of students by the reported behaviour of one or two. I shall certainly take into account the point made by my hon. Friend.

Why are the Government so perverse? Where groups of workers do not want to have anything to do with the Government's £1 plus 4 per cent. formula, the Government try to force it upon them, but where it would be of help to students, the Government withhold it from them. How can the right hon. Lady justify someone buying a £40,000 house and receiving further aid from the Government and the Government withholding everything from students receiving a few pounds a week?

The hon. Gentleman is fundamentally wrong in equating remuneration with grants.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when she will announce details of the next school building programme.

I hope by Easter to have given most local education authorities details of their preliminary lists of projects on which work is expected to start in 1975–77.

Will this programme maintain the trend in expansion? To what scale of cost limit will it be geared? When the local education authorities have received notice of their allocation, will my right hon. Friend consider placing copies of these allocations in the Library for the convenience of hon. Members?

The new programme will be on the existing cost limits. I shall certainly place copies in the Library. We have just announced the first new improvement programme for secondary schools, with some 54 new secondary schools replacing old schools.

Will the cuts which the right hon. Lady is making in the total school building programme over the next two years be felt more in the primary school sector or in the secondary school sector?

I am not aware of the cuts to which the hon. Gentleman refers. There is a vastly increased primary school building programme and a secondary school improvement programme for the first time. Basic needs are certainly down. This is a matter of the number of children. Both the raising of the school leaving age and the countercyclical programme have now been completed.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech at Masham near Ripon on the economy on 25th March.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech made on 25th March at Swinton Conservative College concerning national unity.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech on the economy at Swinton College on 25th March.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech at Masham on 25th March on industrial and economic matters.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech to the Swinton Conservative College on 25th March on economic matters.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech to Swinton Conservative College at Masham on 25th March on industrial relations.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech at the Conservative College, Swinton, Yorkshire, on Sunday 25th March on industrial relations.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the public speech he made on 25th March at Swinton Conservative College on national unity.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech on tripartite partnership, delivered at Masham on 25th March.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech at Swinton, Yorkshire, on industrial relations on 25th March 1973.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his speech on 25th March at Swinton Conservative College on the subject of industrial relations.

As I told the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) on 29th March, I did so on 26th March.

In his speech the Prime Minister said that the Conservative Party represented all the people and the consumers and not just sectional interests. Therefore, will he say why his Government agreed in Luxembourg last week to sell butter to the Russians for only 8p per 1b. when butter sells at 28p per 1b. in Britain? Hundreds of tons of butter are involved. It is forecast that before the end of this year there will be a further increase of 5p per 1b. to the British housewife.

The full co-the mountain of butter which had been accumulated before we became a member of the Community and which was held as a result of intervention by the six former members of the Community. We did not, therefore, think that we were entitled to prevent this taking place.

Which of the Government's policies does the Prime Minister consider has had the most unifying influence in the nation? Is it his taxation policies which favour the rich, his housing policies which favour the owner-occupier against the council tenant or the Industrial Relations Act which penalises the trade unions? [HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."] Have not those policies been the most divisive policies for 100 years? For the right hon. Gentleman to talk about unifying the nation is absolute nonsense.

The full cooperation which we have had from the trade union movement as well as from employers in the standstill now in stage 2 completely contradicts everything that the hon. Gentleman has said.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that what Mr. Scanlon described as a victory for the Government was a victory for common sense? Does he also agree that industrial action is costly not only to individuals but to industries and the country as a whole? Furthermore, does my right hon. Friend agree with the right hon. Member for East Ham, North (Mr. Prentice), who described the proposed strike on 1st May as wrong in principle and wrong in tactics?

I certainly agree with the remark which has just been quoted. It is not a question of a victory for anyone; it is a national victory that we should be able to move forward together with an expanding economy in these circumstances. I hope that it can become a voluntary arrangement, as I have previously said.

Is it not dishonest of the Prime Minister to talk about curbing prices when at the end of this month he will impose a further rent increase on millions of private tenants and council tenants? Is it not a poor excuse to say that there will be rent rebates when only a minority will be eligible? Only 750,000 will have the opportunity of applying for these rebates out of a total of 6 million council house families. Is that a good Government excuse?

The hon. Gentleman is quite wrong with his figures. If he takes the total number of those in local authority houses and the private tenants who will be able to get rebates, he will find that the figure is very much greater than 750,000, because the 750,000 figure relates to private tenancies alone.

Give us the number.

There is no need for the hon. Gentleman to shout. The plain fact is that by putting up the needs requirement by £3·50 we have covered all of those up to average industrial earnings level even after the payment of £1 plus 4 per cent. This means, therefore, that this will be of great benefit to all those tenants.

How many?

Since the right hon. Gentleman emphasised national unity, whatever happened to the women in view of the Daily Express revelation about the slump in the Tory female vote? Is he not interested in having women in his "one nation"?

Unlike the hon. Member's leader, I pay no attention to public opinion polls.

Further to Mr. Scanlon's suggestion that discussions might be resumed between the trade unions and the Government during the coming summer, may I ask my right hon. Friend to make it clear, as he has done in the past, that this is the Government's wish and that, if these negotiations were to be successful, they might lead to a phase 3 of the counter-inflation policy which would be much easier for both the unions and the Government to sustain than phases 1 and 2 have proved to be?

Yes, Sir, that is of course the Government's view and it is our wish to resume these talks. I was glad that Mr. Scanlon expressed the same desire yesterday and I hope that we shall now be able to arrange for them to take place.

Can we get back to the butter mountain? Does not the right hon. Gentleman remember telling the House, along with his colleagues, time and time again that the reason why we had to join the Common Market was to enable us to compete with the two super-Powers? This is a funny way of competing, is it not?

The hon. Member would not be able to appreciate that by this sale the Commission has removed what the hon. Gentleman rightly calls a mountain of butter which has been a threat to world markets, a threat recognised particularly by those countries for which the hon. Gentleman always claims to have such concern—namely, New Zealand and the other Commonwealth countries.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that, despite his remarks in that speech about unity in the nation, Great Britain is terribly divided at the moment. [Laughter.] I know that this is a joke to Conservative hon. Members but there are feelings of great bitterness, with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer under the right hon. Gentleman's policies. How can he reconcile that with calling for national unity? Would he not agree that in times of stress the British working man will rally to his country, provided that there is fair play and social justice? Will the Prime Minister therefore give us today a date on which he will repeal or amend the Industrial Relations Act, to ensure that a new climate can be created?

In the two years up to October 1972, the real income of the poorest section of the community rose by nearly 5½ per cent. a year—faster than that of any other section of the community and twice as fast over the first two years of this Government as over the previous six years of the Labour Government.

rose—

Hear, hear.

Order. The hon. Member has a Question down and he is entitled to put a supplementary question.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that it would help the situation in Europe if Labour Members would join the British delegation to the European Parliament?

I always like to take the optimistic view that for the Labour Party to accept its responsibilities would always be helpful. [Interruption.]

I heard the hon. Member's intervention. A Member is entitled to be heard if I call him.

rose—

In that speech the right hon. Gentleman pretended to be on the side of the poor as well as on the side of the rich. Does he think that he is being thought of now in the Conservative ranks as one who has deserted the rich, since the racialist millionaire Monday Club members have decided to back the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell)?

Does not the question of this butter illustrate to ordinary British people the absurdity of the common agricultural policy? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] Is it not time that the Government's representative made it clear to the Common Market that the CAP has to be radically changed or abandoned?

Hear, hear.

We have always pointed out the weaknesses of the common agricultural policy and also its strengths. The Minister of Agriculture is at this moment dealing with these problems with the other Ministers of Agriculture in the Council of Ministers.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement about his recent meeting with representatives of the TUC to discuss their request for an inquiry into the hospital ancillary workers' pay claim.

I met representatives of the TUC and some of the unions directly concerned with the hospital ancillary staff on 26th March and we discussed how best to move towards a settlement of the present dispute.

Does the Prime Minister believe, as his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Services implied in our recent debate, that the Government's whole economic strategy or even the Government themselves might collapse if the hospital ancillary workers' claim were to be met? Is not this the best possible argument for the workers winning?

More than 2 million workers have now made settlements under stage 2 voluntarily. We have put to the hospital ancillary workers the arrangements under stage 2 and said that they can go to the Pay Board, already established, to put forward any special reasons why they think that an anomaly should be dealt with. This is a perfectly fair argument.

Would not the best way for the lowest-paid to become better off be for them to accept stage 2 and then put their case to the Pay Board in stage 3?

Yes, Sir, that is absolutely right. Stage 2 has deliberately tilted the balance in the interests of the lower-paid. The women among the ancillary workers receive above average earnings for women in industry. These workers could have had this from 14th March onwards. As soon as they settle, they will get the pay.

While one accepts the Prime Minister's difficulties, may I ask whether he does not accept that people on take-home pay of £15 a week are very badly paid? If our economy is such that we cannot afford to pay those employed by the State more than £15, would he not be better employed in trying to get some of that subsidised Common Market butter to sell to our hospital workers at 8p a pound instead of sending it to the Russians?

The average earnings—

£15 a week.

The average earning of these workers are just under £28 a week for men and just under £21 a week for women—

For how many hours?

The offer will bring those figures up to just over £30 a week for men and nearly £23 a week for women.

asked the Prime Minister if he will transfer the functions of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in relation to the conduct of Government policy in the EEC to the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.

No, Sir.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is something wrong when a senior Cabinet Minister who is supposed to represent this country has no Question Time allocation of his own and therefore cannot be questioned on matters of policy like the mountain of butter which has been referred to? If there is to be no change of policy, would it not be better to end the fiction that the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster speaks for Britain and admit that he has simply been relegated to the position of office boy to the Foreign Secretary?

There is no justification for that remark. The Foreign Secretary represents this country in the Council of Ministers. The Chancellor of the Duchy can accompany him or represent him when required.

When the hon. and learned Member for Lincoln (Mr. Taverne) was appointed to the European Parliament, was he not a paid-up member of the Labour Party? [HON. MEMBERS: "No, he was not."] Does my right hon. Friend know why the Opposition were not prepared to have a debate on that subject, knowing their implacable dislike of the European Parliament? If he does not know the answer, will he ask the Leader of the Opposition?

The Leader of the Opposition must speak for himself.

Yes, Sir. In view of the Prime Minister's concern about New Zealand, which he expressed in a previous answer, will he say whether the Chancellor of the Duchy is pressing, as the Labour Government insisted as part of our terms for joining the Common Market, that we should continue, for a generation, to get cheap New Zealand butter?

We made a satisfactory arrangement for New Zealand and the Labour Government never insisted on anything in negotiations in Europe, as the right hon. Gentleman knows full well. He has consistently misled this House and the country—[Interruption.]—by saying that when he went round to visit the Heads of Government in Europe he was laying down the terms they had to accept. He knows full well that was not the case, and neither did they accept them and they never would have done. [Interruption.]

The Prime Minister is wrong. I have quoted in this House the Cabinet minutes and the record of all the Six talks in Europe. What the Prime Minister is saying about the Labour Party is a lie.

Oh.

If the right hon. Gentleman chooses to use unparliamentary language, that is a matter for him. [Interruption.]

Order. I deprecate the use of that word. [Interruption.] Nevertheless the Prime Minister is answering and he must be heard.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. If you deprecate that word I will withdraw it. I will substitute instead the phrase you have twice allowed the Chancellor of the Exchequer to use. What the Prime Minister has said is a pack of lies.

The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that what I am saying is the truth. He was never able to insist on that visit to Europe that the Community should accept the terms he is said to have laid down.

Order. It is quite clear that we had better move on.