asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will make a statement on her intentions with regard to the implementation of the Russell Report.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what proposals she has for implementing the Russell Report; and if she will make a statement.

My Department's preparatory work is nearing completion and I hope to arrange discussions with the major adult education interests in the next few weeks.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that the House has been waiting a very long time for the Government to make up their mind on this important report? Is she aware that we believe the real reason for the delay in publishing the Government's policy on this report is the meanness of the Treasury?

I am happy that the hon. Gentleman has a reply which indicates that a document will be out in a few weeks' time as a basis for discussion.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the adult education world has been waiting for four years for the report to appear and has been waiting six months for her to decide to do something about it, while in the meantime everybody has been subject to inflationary pressures? Will she, therefore, in addition to any grant she may be considering, also give an interim amount to the Workers' Educational Association to enable it to carry on its work, especially its experimental work, in addition to any grant for industrial relations work?

No, Sir. Over the period to which the hon. Gentleman refers the number of people in adult education has already grown by 750,000, so that expenditure on this aspect of education has not been at a standstill.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the best forms of adult education is through the Open University and that she would be wise to give that progressive institution her full support?

The Open University is given comparatively generous support by the Treasury direct from my Department. It is a specialised form of adult education and one which not everybody would wish to follow. I am more concerned at the moment with the other matters to which the Question refers.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will list the range of responsibilities of her Department's Parliamentary Secretaries.

Subject to my own responsibility, matters relating to higher and further education go to my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. St. John-Stevas) and those concerning schools and the youth service to my noble Friend Lord Sandford. This demarcation is not rigid: from time to time each of us deals with any matter which affects my Department.

Is the Secretary of State aware that her hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. St. John-Stevas) is reported as having said last Saturday that, if most ordinary people made certain sacrifices, they could all have their children privately educated? Does she agree with that statement? If so, will she tell my constituents what sort of sacrifices they should make to have their children privately educated?

I cannot confirm the hon. Gentleman's report of my hon. Friend's most excellent speeches which always make a considerable impact and which succeed in totally defeating all Opposition Members, as happened recently on television—defeating them as decisively as they were defeated at the polls on Thursday. It would help if more local authorities were prepared to give grants to independent schools for some parents who particularly wished to take advantage of them. My hon. Friend referred to that aspect.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the attention of her noble Friend has been drawn to the statement of the Birmingham education committee chairman who has told children that if they fail the selection examination they will have to take any school that is available? Is not this blackmail? Will the right hon. Lady take steps to overcome it?

I have heard suggestions about allegations. If my hon. Friend will let me have the details, we will look into the matter. On the whole, however, admissions policy is left to local education authorities. If they act unreasonably one can issue a direction under Section 68 of the Education Act.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to inform the House that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she will enter into discussions with universities and other institutes of higher education with a view to making free places available for Chilean refugees.

My right hon. Friend sees no need to do so.

If young people or academics seeking refuge from the tyranny in Chile seek to obtain admission to universities and other places of higher education in this country, does not the hon. Gentleman consider it important to show a measure of flexibility and ensure that they can come here with some hope of resuming their academic careers?

I understand that there are about 50 Chilean students, almost entirely postgraduate, at institutions of higher education in Britain. But if the hon. Gentleman has any particular cases in mind in which he thinks that either my right hon. Friend or I may be able to help, we shall be glad to hear from him.

Can my hon. Friend say who is paying for those 50 students?

The payment for those students is a matter for them; it is not a matter for my Department. I do not know what private arrangements they have made but, so far as I know, the Department is not paying for them.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that progressive opinion throughout the world, including some Governments, is most critical of the action taken by Her Majesty's Government in many spheres regarding their policy towards the Fascist junta in Chile? As an educationist of some repute, does he think that it would be worth while extending the opportunities of our free education system to those victims of Fascist repression who have done nothing that could conceivably be called wrong in a democratic State in their own country?

Without going into the foreign political implications of what the hon. Gentleman has said, as I pointed out in reply to an earlier question my right hon. Friend and I will do what we can to help rather on grounds of individuals suffering hardship than on political grounds.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is her estimate of the increase in educational spending on books and equipment in 1974–75.

I have no means of making such an estimate.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that when local authorities are asked to restrict expenditure, as they will be next year, the sphere in which they can do so is extremely narrow and that educational spending, particularly current spending on books, equipment and repairs to buildings, invariably suffers? In her White Paper she said that we needed a 3 per cent. increase in real terms every year in this area. Is it the Government's intention that we shall get it?

I cannot reveal details of the rate support grant negotiations, which are always confidential, but, as the hon. Gentleman knows, those negotiations usually include an improvement factor for non-teaching costs, of which books and equipment form part.

In view of the enormous discrepancy between local education authorities' expenditure on school books and the probability that textbook prices will increase by 15 per cent. in the coming year, may I ask my right hon. Friend to consider the possibility of minimum standards for book expenditure by local education authorities?

I have not so far considered that possibility. It comes under this large block of expenditure on non-teaching costs. In fact, it is one of the fastest rising blocks of expenditure in education, indicating that authorities are giving a good deal more attention to it. There is a later Question on the Order Paper from the reply to which my hon. Friend will see that the amount spent on books in the past has been rising quite rapidly.

Will the right hon. Lady consider the situation of severely handicapped children who require quite expensive advanced technology equipment to enable them to communicate and to learn? Such costs can eat severely into the resources of a school and local authorities. Will the Secretary of State consider making this equipment available directly either through her Department or by persuading the Department of Health and Social Security to provide it to these children for assisting their learning process?

We could not make it available directly through the Department unless it were part of a research project. However, as the hon. Gentleman knows, expenditure on equipment in special schools is very generous. Indeed, I think it is the most generous part of school expenditure today.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the proposed expenditure on school textbooks for the next academic year; and if she will give any easily available figures for such expenditure over the past five years.

I have no information with which to answer the first part of the Question. For the financial years 1969–70 to 1972–73 expenditure by local education authorities in England and Wales on text and library books at out-turn prices was about £13½ million, £16 million, £19½ million and £23 million.

Are those figures in real terms? In answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Marks), the Secretary of State seemed to imply that, because expenditure has been rising, perhaps next year it will level off. Is it an injustice to the Government to say that that is their position?

Yes, indeed, I believe that it is. I made no such implication. Expenditure on books and equipment has been rising, and the hon. Gentleman will remember I replied that it is customary in a rate support grant negotiation to have an improvement factor for this kind of expenditure.

To what extent has that expenditure been rising in real terms?

These figures were at out-turn prices.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what discussions she has had with interested bodies about the future of private education in England and Wales.

None, Sir. The bodies concerned are well aware of my belief that there should be a healthy independent sector in education. From time to time I meet their representatives to discuss general educational matters.

Notwithstanding the timing of the Shadow Cabinet elections, is it not remarkable that the hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) should still put forward educational policies which are contrary to the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights? If he thinks that charging for private education should be made a criminal offence, should he not tell us what sentence would be appropriate?

I am not aware of what dispositions will be made in the Shadow Cabinet. I hope that the hon. Gentleman stays where he is, because he is a great asset to this side of the House.

In noting the intense interest that all Ministers of Education in the present administration seem to have in the private sector, may I ask the right hon. Lady to provide ordinary folk with a sacrificial list of what they ought to go without in order to send their children to private schools?

If any sacrificial list is required, I think it more likely that the Labour Party will have to make one.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what discussions she has had with the Southampton Education Authority concerning the operation of Circular 12/73.

Officials of the Department visited Southampton on 29th October to discuss future building programmes with the education authority.

Will the Minister allow the Southampton education authority to proceed immediately with the rebuilding of the Bitterne Church of England Middle and First School and with the urgently needed improvements to the Deanery Secondary School, for both of which projects tenders have already been received and approved locally within the cost limits?

I am aware that the Southampton local education authority sought final approval for these projects on the day before the circular was issued and that the tenders were within the cost limits. I regret the need to delay starts in these circumstances, but we are bound by the circular. We cannot make exceptions. However, when the period covered by the moratorium comes to be considered we shall certainly have regard to Southampton's case.

Does the moratorium on new contracts end on 1st January?

A circular will be issued as soon as possible setting out the basis for the resumption of building.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what further plans she has for a meeting with the leader of the Inner London Education Authority.

I have no immediate plans for such a meeting.

That is a very disappointing reply. Is the right hon. Lady aware that hundreds of children in London are receiving part-time education because of a shortage of teachers? When will she do something about the London allowance, salaries and housing for teachers, because, instead of part-time education, some children will shortly have no education at all?

Many other education authorities have far less generous staffing than ILEA compared with the number of children receiving full-time education. It is somewhat ironic that the authority with the most generous staffing should have the largest number of schools on part time. Increases in the London allowance, based on the Labour Government's formula in 1967, are payable outside the pay limit and there is a general reference to the Pay Board about the future of the London allowance and its geographical basis.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the trouble in London is not the overall shortage of teachers but the shortage in various specialised subjects?

That is correct, particularly in mathematics, science subjects and handicrafts.

The right hon. Lady has said four times in this House that the Inner London Education Authority has what she described as a generous teacher/pupil ratio. Is she saying that ILEA has all the teachers it needs? If not, what is she saying when she makes that comparison with other authorities?

That is exactly what it means. ILEA has a more generous proportion of teachers to pupils than other authorities. Perhaps it would be as well if in future the quota was set to bring other authorities up to ILEA.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the cost per 100,000 children of public education.

In 1972–73, about £21½ million at out-turn prices, including capital expenditure from revenue and loan charges.

Does my hon. Friend agree not only that would the Labour Party's policy to abolish all private education impose heavy additional expenses on both ratepayers and taxpayers but that, in constituencies such as mine with an above-average proportion of children attending private schools, it would lead to acute overcrowding of local authority schools?

The Opposition's proposals for the closing down of the private education sector would certainly be very expensive. About 500,000 children are involved and by 1981 the cumulative cost of transferring them to the publicly maintained sector could be of the magnitude of close on £1,000 million, including capital and recurrent costs, which is a sum roughly equivalent to our annual bill for teachers.

Will the hon. Gentleman give the breakdown of the level of expenditure on a five-year-old school pupil and on a PhD student at university?

My right hon. Friend does not think it necessary to go into detailed breakdowns of policies that she has no intention of putting into operation.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will now increase the cost limits for educational buildings.

Price movements since the last increase in cost limits are being taken into account in drawing up the arrangements for the resumption of approvals for educational building. An announcement will be made as soon as possible.

Is not the right hon. Lady aware that the situation is extremely serious, especially in London, because the average level of tenders has increased by about 60 per cent. in the last year whereas costs limits have increased by only 22 per cent., with the result that schools being built in London are not up to standard, especially in such things as cloakrooms, showers and changing rooms? As that is not, as far as I know, happening in other parts of the country such as the North and the Midlands, does not the right hon. Lady think that there is an overwhelming case for a regional differentiation in the cost limits?

It would be difficult to get precise regional variations. Tenders do not vary on the basis of regions, nor indeed on the basis of the standards of schools. One of the most important factors in the standards which architects can get out of the cost limits is their own ability to design. I have seen a number of schools in what one might call high-cost areas which have much better facilities than schools in low-cost areas, the differences being brought about by the architects.

Would the right hon. Lady care to forecast what the Bank Rate will be at the end of the moratorium and what she thinks will be the additional cost to local education authorities when they have to go out to tender again to get new prices to build schools which she is not allowing them to build now?

Even if I could, I should not make such a forecast.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that it is not only in the London area that authorities are having great difficulty in keeping within the present cost limits? In Berkshire the difficulties are particularly acute. Will my right hon. Friend consider that area, which is short of school places?

I recently went to a school not far from my hon. Friend's constituency and found that it had excellent standards, even though it was not complete. When we consider the new cost limits we shall look at the tenders coming in to see what new limits need to be adjusted.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will issue a circular to local authorities recommending them to bring the teachers' superannuation scheme into line with that of the National Health Service in respect of employees' contributions.

No, Sir.

How can the hon. Gentleman remain so insensitive to the bitterness of the teachers, which has arisen from the mathematics of their pension scheme and has resulted in the disruption of education services in some areas? There is great sympathy for the teachers, who, it is felt, have been cheated by the mathematics of the scheme and been treated particularly inequitably compared with what we believe to be an analogous situation in the National Health Service. Surely it is wrong that the benefits of the reassessment of the contributions to the scheme should accrue to one side only, namely the employers. In the light of this, will the hon. Gentleman consider the matter more urgently, sympathetically and understandingly than hitherto?

It is true that the teachers feel bitter about this, but their feeling is not justified by the facts. The employee's contribution is a proportion of the new entrant contribution which is higher for the teachers' scheme than for the National Health Service scheme because different factors are involved. Although the levels of benefit are much the same in both schemes, different occupational factors produce different costs. These include the average age of retirement, the rate at which salaries progress, and the number of scheme members who withdraw contributions.

Can my hon. Friend say why teachers pay a higher contribution than civil servants who, as I understand it, make a 6 per cent. contribution compared with a 6¾ per cent. contribution by teachers?

It is precisely because of the variable factors which I have just mentioned. It is fair to point out that at an earlier period teachers paid less. In the National Health Service scheme from 1948 to 1972 the employee's contribution was 6 per cent. and the employer's 8 per cent. Under the teachers' scheme the contributions were 5 per cent. and 5 per cent. until 1956, 6 per cent. and 6 per cent. from then until 1966, and 6 per cent. and 8½ per cent. following that until 1972. There was no request for equivalence in the last period.

Is it not possible that the teachers may be driven to take some form of industrial action because they feel that in this matter they have been gazumped? What urgent measures does the hon. Gentleman propose to take, bearing in mind the anger and bitterness of all the teachers in England and Wales?

I hope that they will not resort to those extreme measures. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would be the last to encourage teachers to take such action. What is important is that it should be explained to teachers as well as to their representatives exactly what are the facts involved in this situation.

Will the hon. Gentleman explain why our pension contribution as Members of the House is 5 per cent., and will he tell us the difference between our occupation and that of teachers who are paying 6¾ per cent.?

Our probation is liable suddenly to be interrupted.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when she expects to announce her future policy regarding students' grants.

My right hon. Friend hopes to announce in the spring the revised rates of grant to take effect from the academic year 1974–75.

I note that reply, but is the hon. Gentleman aware of the urgency of the matter bearing in mind that the present-day value of student grants has been seriously eroded by inflation and that many students now have to rely upon the generosity of their parents? Is he further aware of the real urgency of the need to remove the discrimination which now exists against married women students and the way in which their grant is assessed? Can he assure us that all those matters will receive close attention?

I was aware of the urgency of the matter months ago. That was why my right hon. Friend appointed a working party to go into a number of matters, including the rise in the cost of living and various points which the NUS wished to raise. I have said that I shall consider sympathetically the question of the married woman's grant. My right hon. Friend has increased the grant by £20. That was the first increase since the Labour Party froze the grant in 1968 at the 1965 level.

In the review which the Department is carrying out into student grants, what consideration has been given to the parental contribution and to the matter of discretionary grants?

Both those matters are being carefully considered and I hope that the report on them will shortly be ready. My right hon. Friend has raised the level of disposable income for starting parental contributions, and that has helped many students. We should like to do something more about it, but it is extremely expensive. To abolish the parental contribution altogether would cost £60 million.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that at every Scottish university, with one exception, the intake of students this year is much lower than last year and in previous years, and that this situation is likely to continue for many years? Will he accept that the inadequacy of the grants is an important factor in the number of students at any university?

I am concerned that students, who make a valuable contribution to our society, should get a fair deal, and within the budgetary limits with which we are faced we shall do our best for them.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether, through her inspectorate, she will arrange for a study of intensive instruction methods for the promotion of Russian.

Her Majesty's inspectors are already acquainted with the methods of intensive instruction in Russian, and I do not think that a special study is justified.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that Russia is likely to remain a powerful and influential country for as far ahead as we can see? That will result in a long-term demand for people in this country who can speak Russian, and it is that, and not the short-term demand, which should be the criterion. Will the hon. Gentleman therefore do his utmost to reinstitute the intensive short course in Russian at Liverpool Polytechnic which has had such a high reputation and which his inspectors have recommended should be closed?

I think that without running any risks I can accept the hon. Gentleman's forecast of the permanent existence of Russia. With regard to intensive short courses, from time to time my Department gives approval to a series of one-year intensive short courses in Russian. These are run in further education establishments in order to give teachers of other foreign languages a qualification in Russian. In view of what the hon. Gentleman said, I shall consider the Liverpool case.

In view of the appalling level of syntax, grammar and spelling that we see in some of our letters from graduates and students, would it not be better for the Department to concentrate on the teaching of English?

We have no responsibility for curricula in the schools or for the literacy or illiteracy of our correspondents.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science how many places are being taken at independent schools by local authorities in 1973.

In January 1973 there were 96,126 pupils at non-maintained schools for which local education authorities were paying the full tuition fees. These include 60,983 at direct grant schools, 20,431 at ordinary independent schools, 8,788 at non-maintained special schools and hospital schools and 5,892 received special educational treatment at independent schools.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the broadening of the social base of the pupils in the independent and the direct grant schools is a more useful approach than the Opposition's rather destructive and doctrinaire attitude of abolishing them altogether?

Local education authorities have a very valuable power to provide free accommodation, of a boarding nature, for example, if suitable education cannot otherwise be provided. It is a good thing, too, in other cases that fees may be remitted on grounds of hardship. To have places available in the independent sector is a valuable adjunct to the maintained sector.

The Minister should be very careful about this matter. Is he aware that in a Written Answer to a Question of mine on Monday it was revealed that of the 11 independent schools in Southampton only four were recognised as being efficient by his Department? May I ask him to do nothing whatever to encourage local authorities to send children to those schools which are not recognised as being efficient?

I am always careful when being questioned by the hon. Gentleman. But recognition as efficient is conferred as a special mark of distinction by the Secretary of State—[Laughter.]—yes; I am glad that the Opposition Front Bench has learned something—whereas registration guarantees a certain minimum standard.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science when she expects the projected secondary school building programme for children in Melbourne and the surrounding areas of South Derbyshire will be completed.

Two phases in the construction of the proposed Chellaston Secondary School in Derby, which will provide selective places for children from the Melbourne area, are programmed to start during 1975–76 and 1976–77 respectively. These projects are expected to be completed during 1977 and 1978. No new provision for non-selective pupils from that area is at present included in the building programme.

Is my hon. Friend aware that 1977 will not be soon enough because, as a result of the reorganisation of Derby borough education, children in Melbourne and the surrounding areas of South Derbyshire will now have to continue to take a selective examination in order to compete for places in a non-selective system? Does my hon. Friend really think that this represents equality of educational opportunity?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern for the children of his constituents, but in allocating resources for the replacement of old and sub-standard secondary schools priority naturally has to be given to the most pressing bids made by the authorities. Unfortunately, the replacement of the Melbourne Secondary School has not been given high priority by the Derbyshire authority.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science whether she expects the level of Government spending on education during the financial year 1974–75, already announced, to be sufficient to meet the proposals as set out in the recent White Paper on future priorities in the education service.

Yes, Sir.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that her optimism contrasts sharply with the views of chief education officers who are now wrestling with their financial estimates for the next financial year? Indeed, if the Department is prepared to advise local authorities on the continued expansion of the education service, is it not incumbent upon the Government to see that sufficient funds are available?

The hon. Gentleman will have his full answer when the public expenditure White Paper comes out at the turn of the year. He will be very well aware that expenditure on education in local authorities has been rising extremely fast and looks like continuing to rise.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what steps she is taking to arrest the shortage of teachers in London.

Staffing standards in inner London schools have been consistently among the very best in the country. Last January, for example, the pupil/teacher ratio in secondary schools was 15·4:1 compared with a national average of 17·2:1. In September inner London was just over 1 per cent. below quota. This is common enough over the country as a whole, and I think we shall find that even this year London's schools are probably better staffed overall than most.

That was a ridiculously complacent reply to a parent whose children are coming back from a State school after part-time schooling. May we have an immediate increase in the London allowance? If the Pay Board takes until June next year, this will not only kill the recruitment of teachers in the present academic year but will sabotage recruitment in the next academic year. This is a much more serious problem that the right hon. Lady seems to understand.

I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman was present when I answered a similar Question earlier. The fact is that London has a higher proportion of teachers to pupils than almost any other authority. It is one of the biggest authorities and, therefore, should be one of the most efficient. But it is a fact that the authority which has the worst performance on part-time education has a better staff/pupil ratio than any other authority.

The Minister may have been speaking only about inner London, but she is probably aware that I have written to her about the problems of Newham, which have been aggravated by her Government and her Department. The right hon. Lady knows that children there have been waiting for months for places in schools. She knows that there is a grave shortage of teachers. Will she give some assurance that she will do something to help Newham?

Officials from Newham were in the Department the day after the reports appeared in the Press. They agreed with the Department that there was no shortage of accommodation in the schools for the pupils. My information is that almost all the pupils have been allocated to schools. I am not quite sure of Newham's teacher/pupil ratio. If the hon. Gentleman tables a Question about that I shall do my best to answer it.

Is the right hon. Lady aware that all the statistics in the world about pupil/teacher ratios are no comfort to parents whose children are having part-time education? Does she not feel any responsibility for children who, in the main, are in the greatest need and are being denied full-time education in 1973?

I find it very remarkable that a local education authority, the duties of which are to see that children have schooling and which has the largest proportion of teachers in the country, is unable to provide all of them with full-time education.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that part of the trouble is the gross misrepresentation of this business by the ILEA? In all the circumstances, is it not time to look at this authority as a whole to see whether it is efficiently carrying out its job and, if possible, to get rid of it?

I am aware that a number of my hon. Friends hold that view, but I cannot hold out any hope of looking at the question immediately.

I think that three of the right hon. Lady's answers have contained innuendoes about the Inner London Education Authority. I wonder whether she should steel herself to give the answer which I suppose she was implying. If there are enough teachers in London, why are there 12,000 pupils at present on part-time education?

That is the very question which the Inner London Education Authority, with the teachers in its employ, should ask itself. The hon. Gentleman appears to be asking me to take power to direct it. What the hon. Gentleman does not like and cannot stand is the facts.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is the estimated increase in educational expenditure for 1974–75 in real terms compared with the current year.

I must ask the hon. Lady to await the publication next month of the Government's annual public expenditure White Paper.

Will the right hon. Lady tell the House now—because she must know the answer—whether the estimated increase in real terms represents the forecast percentage increase in the White Paper? Will she also give an assurance to the House that, despite the chaotic financial and economic situation of the country, there will be no cut-back on education expenditure in real terms in the current year?

I think that the hon. Lady must wait for the publication of the White Paper. She knows that these forecasts are not made absolute before that occurs.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what discussions she has had with leaders of the teachers' unions about the composition of the Burnham Committee; and if she will make a statement.

I have discussed this question in recent months with representatives of several teacher associations. I have no statement to make at present.

From such figures as are available, can it be inferred that the present representation does not accurately reflect the present size and variety of teachers' unions? May I ask my right hon. Friend whether she will take the initiative in negotiations for changes?

It is not easy to get the precise proportions in which the unions represent the teachers, because I have no power to demand specific figures of numbers in the several unions, although the National Association of Schoolmasters voluntarily supplies them. I would agree with my hon. Friend that women are certainly very under-represented by women on the teachers' panel, but I hope to have a statement to make within the next few weeks or months.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will introduce minimum standards of work space per teacher in staff rooms in schools and first-aid rooms for students.

The Standards for School Premises Regulations 1972 already require all maintained primary and secondary schools to have staff common rooms and suitable accommodation for medical inspection and treatment. I am reluctant to go into greater detail.

As the staff facilities at some of the older schools in particular are completely inadequate for members of the staff who have to undertake administrative work on the premises, and as the first-aid facilities are inadequate or even non-existent, will my right hon. Friend at least consider bringing schools within the provisions of the Offices, Shops and Railways Premises Act, so that members of staff are at least considered equal to, for example, typists in offices?

I would agree with my hon. Friend in his general aim. I think that the question really turns upon the amount of resources available for improvement, and, as he knows, the present Government have given more for improvements than any other Government have done.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if she will make a statement on the effect of phase 3 on school building.

School building is included in the arrangements for phasing forward public building works announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 8th October. The general effect of the statement is that new starts which would otherwise have started will be delayed by about three months. The basis on which approvals are to be resumed from 1st January will be announced as soon as possible.

Is my right hon. Friend aware how very frustrating the delay has been to the ordinary process of building our schools, particularly in the country areas? May we have an assurance that we shall have the details as soon as possible and certainly before Christmas?

Yes. It must be before Christmas, because approvals are due to start again on 1st January.

The right hon. Lady has said that there will be an increase in unit costs for school building when building is resumed. Will she ensure that those authorities which have been unable to get tenders but already have approval will be able to get an increase in the new pricing?

We will take into account some of the tender prices when we look at unit costs.

I am not entirely clear about what was said earlier. Is the right hon. Lady saying that the moratorium definitely ends on 1st January?

If the hon. Gentleman had been listening, he would have heard me tell my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury (Mr. Marten) that approvals restart on 1st January.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science what has been the total capital expenditure on schools in East Suffolk since 1st July 1967.

Sir Harwood Harrison.

Question No. 25—but may I point out, Mr. Speaker, that the year 1970 should be substituted for 1967?

I am sorry, but clairvoyance is not among the attributes of the Department—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—but only powers of prophecy, such as that the Opposition will long remain on the Opposition benches.

I should like to tell my hon. Friend that I informed his office of the change in the year. I should also like to say to him how very grateful we in East Suffolk are for the great interest which the Government are taking in education there.

I am grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend for his unfailing courtesy. The starts programme in East Suffolk has new major projects worth £1,125,000, and that is the largest major programme the authority has ever had.