Written Answers To Questions
Thursday 8 November 1990
Defence
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will announce changes to the defence cash limits and running costs limit for 1990–91.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will announce any changes to the defence cash limits and running costs limit for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimates, the following changes will be made:
(1) Defence Cash Limits
£000s
| |||
Class and Vote
| Current Cash Limit
| Increase
| Revised Cash Limit
|
| I, 1 | 8,968,295 | 40,000 | 9,008,295 |
| I, 2 | 8,531,208 | 213,389 | 8,744,597 |
These changes, which increase the block defence cash limit by £253,389,000 from £21,332,060,000 to £21,585,449,000, reflect the full take-up of entitlement to carry-forward of capital underspending under the end-year flexibility scheme (announced by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990, Official Report, columns 235–40) and additional costs being incurred on the defence budget as a result of the crisis in the Gulf.
The changes also take account of a decrease of £114,799,000 to compensate for an overspend on class I, votes 1, 2, 4 and 5, in 1989–90. This follows the normal practice of reducing the limit for one financial year by the amount of any overspend in the previous year.
(2) Running Costs Limit.
The running costs limit for the Department will be increased by £40,000,000 from £5,232,678,000 to £5,272,678,000. This reflects additional running costs being incurred on the defence budget as a result of the crisis in the Gulf.
The increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Northern Ireland
Security
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether he will publish a statement of the Government's security policy in Northern Ireland.
I have today placed copies of a statement of the Government's security policy in Northern Ireland in the Library and the Vote Office. The text is as follows:
The Government's Security Policy In Northern Ireland
Constitutional Position
1. Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom because that is the will of the majority of people who live there. It will not cease to be a part of the United Kingdom unless that situation changes. Majority desire for a change in status clearly does not exist at present. There is no reason to expect this to alter in the foreseeable future.
Aims and Objectives
2. The Government's aims are:
3. So that these aims can be achieved, it is the first priority of the Government in Northern Ireland to eradicate terrorism, from whichever section of the community it comes. There is no acceptable level of violence and, for so long as violence continues, it will be met with a firm and resolute response.
Strategy
4. To this end, the Government will:
5. The Government will implement this strategy with total commitment until terrorism has been defeated in Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom.
6. In parallel, the Government will implement effective measures in the political, social and economic fields, designed to promote equality of treatment, economic well-being and stable democratic institutions. These measures will help to create a climate in Northern Ireland in which peaceful political development can take place, thereby complementing and reinforcing the Government's security strategy.
7. In accordance with this strategy, which is endorsed by the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the General Officer Commanding the Armed Forces in Northern Ireland:
8. The Government recognise that, to be fully effective, the actions of the police and armed forces against terrorism in Northern Ireland require the support of all sides of the community. The actions of the security forces must, therefore, at all times be such as to create and maintain confidence in their integrity and professionalism, as well as in their operational effectiveness.
9. The Government call on men and women of good will from both traditions in Northern Ireland to co-operate with the security forces as they carry out their duty to protect the community. Such co-operation may include accepting the inconvenience which may result from security force operations against terrorists and reporting crime, including terrorist crime, to the police.
10. The Government believe that confidence between the community and the police and armed forces can best be achieved if both traditions are properly represented in the locally recruited forces. Hence the Government believe that all those who recognise the importance of building and retaining that confidence have a duty to encourage members of both traditions to co-operate with and to join those forces.
National Finance
Cash Limits
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has any changes to announce to the 1990–91 running costs limit for the Government Actuary's Department.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the running costs limit for class XVIII, vote 15 will be increased by £60,000 from £3,099,000 to £3,159,000 to provide for new work on insurance supervision on behalf of the Department of Trade and Industry.The cost of this increase will be recovered from Department of Trade and Industry on repayment and the cash limit for the vote is therefore unchanged.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any changes are proposed in the cash limit and running costs limit for 1990–91 for the Inland Revenue.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XVIII, vote 7 will be increased by £26,032,000 from £1,377,913,000 to £1,403,945,000 and the Department's running cost limit by £11,032,000 from £1,316,363,000 to £1,327,395,000. The increase in running costs reflects the take up of end-year flexibility entitlement announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990, Official Report, columns 235–40, (£4,987,000), a transfer of £45,000 from the Department of Social Security (administration and miscellaneous) vote (class XIV vote 7) for a computer project setting up a register of pension schemes, and £6,000,000 for publicity consequent on the decision to introduce new arrangements for the taxation of bank and building society interest in 1991–92. The increase in the cash limit also includes £15,000,000 for capital expenditure on accommodation for staff required to operate the new bank and building society arrangements. The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is proposing any change to the Central Statistical Office's cash limit or running costs limit for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XVIII vote 13 will be increased by £1,079,000 from £27,394,000 to £28,473,000 and the running costs limit by £1,018,000 from £21,439,000 to £22,457,000. The increase primarily reflects provision for the package of measures announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 17 May 1990, Official Report, column 484, to improve the quality of the statistics produced by the CSO in three areas—services, companies and balance of payments. The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any changes are proposed in the cash limit and running cost limit for 1990–91 for Customs and Excise.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XVIII, vote 6 will be increased by £6,936,000 from £640,926,000 to £647,862,000 and the running cost limit for Customs and Excise by £2,722,000 from £573,077,000 to £575,799,000. The increase in the running cost limit arises from the take-up of full end-year flexibility entitlement announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990, Official Report, columns 235–40, and the costs associated with a programme for the training of overseas customs officers, which are being met from receipts from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (class II, vote 1), the Home Office (class IX, vote 3), and the Overseas Development Administration (class II, vote 5). The increase in the cash limit includes take-up of the full end-year flexibility entitlement for capital expenditure as well as increased legal costs. The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Civil Service
Cash Limits
To ask the Minister for the Civil Service if there are any proposals to change the 1990–91 cash limit and the running costs limit for the Office of the Minister for the Civil Service.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for the Office of the Minister for the Civil Service (class XIX, vote 1) will be increased by £662,000 from £43,621,000 to £44,283,000. The increase will be offset by a reduction in the cash limit for the Cabinet Office: other services (class XIX, vote 2).The increase is required to cover the cost of providing financial support to other Government Departments in respect of their secondees to European Community institutions; the salary costs of staff specifically recruited to increase future British representation in European Community institutions; the cost of an efficiency unit study of ministerial correspondence; the cost of repairing storm damage to the Civil Service College's premises at Sunningdale Park and the bringing forward of some capital expenditure from the college's 1991–92 building programme. In addition, receipts of interest on loans to the Civil Service Sports Council are to be reclassified. from appropriations in aid to extra receipts payable to the Consolidated Fund.Some of the above changes in provision have a consequent effect on the Department's running costs limit which will be increased by £142,000 from £33,722,000 to £33,864,000.The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Trade And Industry
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether any changes will be made to his Department's cash limit and running cost limits for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class IV, vote 2 (support for industry, international trade, statutory and regulatory work, consumer protection, and administration) will be increased by £14,304,000 from £787,377,000 to £801,681,000. The running costs limit for the Department of Trade and Industry will be reduced by £470,000 from £304,234,000 to £303,764,000.The increase in the cash limit covers a rise in grant-in-aid provision for the English Industrial Estates Corporation from a token £1,000 to £24,758,000 to compensate for a shortfall in income caused by a rescheduling of asset sales. It also covers an increase of £4,686,000 in departmental capital expenditure for full take-up of the end-year flexibility entitlements announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July, columns
235–38, an increase of £3,000,000 in capital expenditure at the National Engineering Laboratory, increased export promotion expenditure of £5,677,000 partially offset by increased receipts of £1,900,000, increased contributions to the general agreement on tariffs and trade and the International Customs Tariff Bureau of £123,000 made necessary by exchange rate movements, an increase in provision of £3,043,000 to pay for more investigations under the Companies Act and to publicise legislation under the Consumer Protection Act, an increase of £36,000 to reflect a transfer of responsibility from the Department of the Environment for advice provided by the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux on the community charge, and provision of £120,000 for ex-gratia payments to investors in Kingfisher and Dixons following the early release of the Kingfisher/Dixons takeover report. There is also a requirement to offset a shortfall of £500,000 in receipts in relation to contributions to the Universal Postal Union.
These additions are partially offset by reductions of £17,000,000 in respect of collaborative research, £5,000,000 in respect of exceptional projects, £2,000,000 for the inner cities initiative, £1,000,000 for the consultancy initiatives, £500,000 for consultancies and formal inquiries, in all cases reflecting currently expected levels of demand, and £143,000 for publicity. Running costs provision has been reduced by £15,000 and programme provision reduced by £80,000 to reflect the transfer of responsibility to the Overseas Development Administration for the International Tropical Timber Organisation. There is a take-up of £217,000 of the £1,524,000 end-year flexibility entitlement on running costs announced on 25 July, cols 235–38. This is offset completely by a delayed reduction in gross running cost provision as a result of the transfer of certain central staff to the Radiocommunications Agency, which is exempt from gross running cost control. A further reduction of £455,000 reflecting an expected increase in VAT refunds on contracted-out services gives an overall reduction in the running costs limit of £470,000. The increase in VAT receipts is wholly offset by reductions in other receipts for central and miscellaneous services.
In addition, the opportunity is being taken to transfer £200,000 of provision between capital expenditure subheads of vote 2 in respect of work being contracted out by the Department on behalf of Companies House executive agency. An increase in expenditure of £817,000 at the Radiocommunications Agency is being fully matched by increased receipts.
These changes are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
In addition, a supplementary estimate of £4,692,000 is to be sought for class, IV vote 4, Export Credits Guarantee Department: Administration. The cash limit will be increased by £4,692,000 from £40,749,000 to £45,441,000, and the running costs limit by £4,692,000 from £38,800,000 to £43,492,000. This expenditure is not included in the planning total. The supplementary is required to meet additional running costs arising from work to prepare for the privatisation of ECGD's short-term credit insurance operation, announced to the House on 18 December 1989. It was announced in the Gracious Speech that a Bill is to be introduced in the current Session.
Agriculture, Fisheries And Food
Cash Limits
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether any changes are proposed in the cash limits for the intervention board executive agency.
Yes. Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class III, vote 2 (administration) will be increased by £5,009,000 from £37,508,000 to £42,517,000. Within this limit running costs including VAT recovery will be increased by £1,257,000 from £22,091,000 to £23,348,000; capital will be increased by £586,000 of which £304,000 is in respect of end-of-year flexibility as announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990, Official Report, columns 235–38; agency services will be increased by £3,286,000, and appropriation-in-aid, excluding VAT recovery on running costs, will be increased by £120,000. These increases in administration costs reflect the substantial growth in CAP market support activity, primarily in respect of beef intervention, the initial costs of relocating part of the agency to Newcastle, and take up of the capital end-year flexibility entitlement.
| £ thousand | |||||
| Class and vote | Current cash limit | Changes end year flexibility (a) Capital running costs | Other | Revised cash limit | |
| VII, 1 | 1,808,062 | — | — | -9,200 (b) | 1,798,862 |
| 2 | 253,236 | 2,000 | 524 | 3,933 (c) | 259,693 |
| 4 | 132,909 | 2,000 | 659 | 228 (d) | 135,796 |
| 5 | 267,518 | — | — | l (e) | 267,519 |
Official Report, columns. 235–40.
(b) Decreases of £7,000,000 in respect of a transfer to the Department of the Environment non voted cash limit DOE/UA for costs incurred by the Black Country development corporation in acquiring land for the black country spine road and £2,200,000 transferred to class VII vote 2 for transport safety campaigns.
(c) Increases of £853,000 to repay accrued interest on compensation awarded to the United Kingdom in respect of the Amoco Cadiz oil pollution incident; and of £750,000 to meet the cost of dealing with the Rosebay oil pollution incident in May 1990. The Rosebay costs are expected to be recoverable in due course. There is also £358,000 transferred from the Department of the Environment (class VIII vote 8) in respect of certain running costs.
(d) An increase of £228,000 transferred from class VII vote 2 to cover certain staff-related costs transferred from my Department to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency.
(e) Token. Provision has been made to enable certain payments in respect of transport facilities grants to be made direct to the private sector.
The running costs limit of the Department of Transport has been increased by £1,515,000 from £320,901,000 to £322,416,000.
The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Agriculture Council
To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the outcome of the meeting of the Agriculture Council held in Brussels on 5 and 6 November.
I represented the United Kingdom at this meeting together with my hon. Friend the Minister for Trade.Agreement was reached on a text specifying possible reductions in agricultural support and protection in the context of the current GATT round. This is now being put on the table in Geneva.The text agreed makes only three relatively small changes from that originally proposed by the Commission and if, following negotiations in GATT, its proposals were put into effect, they would represent a significant liberalisation of agricultural markets and trade. A Council statement on the method of implementing the reductions in support and on any accompanying measures which may be adopted as a consequence was also agreed. This fully protects the United Kingdom's right to insist upon measures which are even-handed between member states and between individuals.Agreement was also reached on the adaptations to the common agricultural policy necessary following German reunification.
Transport
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what changes he proposes to make to the 1990–91 cash limit and running costs limit for his Department.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limits in class VII will be changed as follows:
Crossrail, London
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action he has taken to safeguard the east-west crossrail.
Initial safeguarding directions under the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1988 have been made. These came into force on 5 November. London Underground and British Rail will be consulting those affected. If need be the initial directions will be amended in the light of those consultations.
Overseas Development
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what changes have been made in 1990–91 cash limits for expenditure by the Overseas Development Administration.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit on the overseas aid vote (class II vote 5) will be increased by £5,855,000 from £1,471,654,000 to £1,477,509,000. The increase provides for the estimated costs in 1990–91 of the establishment of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in London. This provision is additional to and separate from the resources for the official overseas aid programme for developing countries. The running costs limit for the ODA has also been increased by £305,000 from £33,109,000 to £33,414,000. These increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Prime Minister
Cash Limits
To ask the Prime Minister if there are any proposals to change the 1990–91 cash limit for the Cabinet Office: other services.
The cash limit for the Cabinet Office: other services (class XIX, vote 2) will be reduced by £662,000 from £21,918,000 to £21,256,000. This reflects the reprofiling of the timetable of a major capital project. Expenditure will now fall in later years. The decrease offsets an increase in the cash limit of the Cabinet Office: OMCS (class XIX, vote 1) of £662,000 for which a supplementary estimate has been submitted.
Employment
Disabled People
To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what arrangements have been made to publish the evaluation of his Department's special schemes for people with disabilities, as promised in paragraph 6.23 of the consultative document, "Employment and Training for People with Disabilities".
I published the evaluation on 2 November and placed copies in the Library. Copies have been sent to all parties who were on the original distribution list for the consultative document which include organisations of and for people with disabilities. Comments are invited by 1 February 1991, particularly on the issues of priorities in future expenditure, the balance between employers' and the Government's contribution to costs and the help available under the schemes to people with disabilities in self-employment.
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether any changes will be made to his Department's cash limits or running costs limits for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimates, the following changes will be made.The cash limit for class VI, vote 1 (training and enterprise programmes) will be reduced by £14,970,000 from £2,467,308,000 to £2,452,338,000. This is the net effect of a token £1,000 estimate; of increased provision of £1,159,000 (running costs) and £2,000,000 (capital costs) for full take-up of end-year flexibility for both capital and running costs as announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990,
Official Report,cols. 236–39;of a decrease of £2,500,000 to offest the increase sought on class VI, vote 4; of the transfer of £15,279,000 to the employment service in connection with the transfer of the employment rehabilitation service; and a decrease of £350,000 in connection with the transfer of responsibility for the North London school of physiotherapy to the Department of Health.
The cash limit for class VI, vote 2 (other programmes and central services), will be increased by £372,000 from £213,825,000 to £214,197,000. This is the net effect of an increase of £486,000 for full take-up of running costs end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July; an increase of £6,000 from class III, vote 4 to fund the inclusion of agriculture and horticulture in the small firms loan guarantee scheme and a decrease of £120,000 to offset the increase sought on class VI, vote 4.
The cash limit for class VI, vote 3 (Employment Service), will be increased by £21,328,000 from £393,976,000 to £415,304,000. This increase is partly offset by a reduction in the cash limit on class VI, vote 1. The increase is the result of the transfer of £15,279,000 in connection with the transfer of the employment rehabilitation service from the Training Agency (class VI, vote 1) and an increase of £2,725,000 (running costs) and £3,324,000 (capital costs) for full take-up of running costs end-year flexibility entitlement and part take-up of capital end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July.
The cash limit on class VI, vote 4 (Health and Safety Commission and Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service) will be increased by £2,620,000 from £134,591,000 to £137,211,000. This is the net effect of increased provision of £2,500,000 for running costs for the Health and Safety Commission (subhead A1 of class VI, vote 4), offset by a corresponding decrease on class VI, vote 1; and an increase of £120,000 for the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (subhead A2 of class VI, vote 4) for arbitrators' fees and exhibitions, offset by a corresponding decrease on class VI, vote 2.
The running costs limit for the Department of Employment (votes 1, 2 and 3) will be increasing by £1,870,000 from £914,397,000 to £916,267,000.
The running costs limit for subhead A1 of class VI, vote 4 (Health and Safety Commission) will increase by £2,500,000 from £98,121,000 to £100,621,000.
These increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement.
Wales
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he proposes to make any changes to the cash limits for class XVI, votes 5, 8 and 10, and for WO/LACAP and WO/UA in the current year.
Yes. Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimates, the cash limit on class XVI, vote 5 is being increased by £7,586,000, from £317,825,000 to £325,411,000; the cash limit on class XVI, vote 8 is being increased by £14,207,000, from £962,838,000 to £977,045,000; the cash limit on class XVI, vote 10 is being increased by £5,475,000, from £1,604,300,000 to £1,609,775,000; the cash limit for WO/LACAP is being increased by £10,400,000, from £357,188,000 to £367,588,000 and the cash limit for WO/UA is being increased by £2,792,000, from £67,112,000 to £69,904,000.The increase on vote 5 relates to the take-up of full end-year flexibility entitlement on capital expenditure (£7,651,000) as announced by the Chief Secretary on 25 July 1990 at columns
235–38,partly offset by a reduction of £65,000 in respect of a contribution to be made to the Department of Health for the Peto institute. The Department of Health will take a corresponding increase to class XIII, vote 3.
The increase to vote 8 takes account of the termination of VAT refunds (£10,480,000), additional expenditure for the senior nurses pay award (£82,000), an increase to general medical costs (2,749,000) and the take-up of full end-year flexibility entitlement on capital expenditure (£896,000) as announced by the Chief Secretary on 25 July 1990.
The increase to vote 10 is in respect of block grant payable to local authorities as compensation under section 67 of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980.
The increase to the local authority capital cash limit (WO/LACAP) takes account of additional provision for home renovation grants.
The increase to the urban aid capital cash limit (WO/UA) takes account of the take-up of full end-year flexibility entitlement on capital expenditure (£2,792,000) as announced by the Chief Secretary on 25 July 1990.
These increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Attorney-General
Cash Limits
To ask the Attorney-General whether any changes have been made to the class X, vote 12, cash limit and running costs limit for the Public Record Office.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class X, vote 12 will be increased by £571,000 from £19,823,000 to £20,394,000. This increase will be charged to the reserve and will not add to the planned total of public expenditure. The increase arises partly as a result of additional costs incurred in respect of a VAT surcharge and improved security measures. The running cost limit for the Public Record Office will as a result be increased by £292,000 from £16,462,000 to £16,754,000.The increase in the cash limit will also enable the Public Record Office to meet the cost of planned capital works originally provided for in 1989–90 in class XX, vote II, but which have slipped into 1990–91. Of the increase £279,000 comes into end-of-year flexibility arrangements as announced to the House of Commons by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990 at columns
236–38.
The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
To ask the Attorney-General whether any changes have been made to the class X, vote 3, cash limit and running costs limit for the Northern Ireland court service.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class X, vote 3 has been increased by £3,180,000 from £16,360,000 to £19,540,000 and the running costs limit by £200,000 from £12,606,000 to £12,806,000. This increase has been charged to the reserve and will not add to the planned total of public expenditure. The increases arise because of additional costs incurred in respect of bomb damage to court buildings, extra security staff, judicial removals and legal representation at coroners' inquests. Additional appropriations-in-aid of £200,000 will offset the increase in the running costs limit.The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
To ask the Attorney-General whether any changes have been made to the class X, vote 9, cash limit and running costs limit for the Treasury Solicitors Department.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class X, vote 9, will be increased by £1,508,000 from £14,354,000 to £15,862,000 and the running costs limit by £1,558,000 from £15,334,000 to £16,892,000.The increase is required as a result of improved recruitment and retention of staff.The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Home Department
Police And Criminal Evidence Act
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the revised codes of practice made under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 come into force.
My right hon. and learned Friend's intention was to bring the codes into force on 1 January 1991. In order to make some small amendments to the codes, however, and to give the police more time for training, we have today laid a fresh set of draft codes before Parliament and plan to bring them into force on 1 April 1991.
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he intends to make any changes to the 1990–91 cash limits within his responsibilities and to his Department's running costs limit.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit on class IX, vote 3, Home Office administration, immigration and police support services, England and Wales, will be reduced by £257,000 from £758,925,000 to £758,668,000. This is caused by the transfer of responsibility for the new drugs demand reduction task force to the Department of Health.In consequence of this transfer of responsibility, the Home Office running costs limit will be reduced by £242,000 from £1,012,659,000 to £1,012,417,000.
Energy
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy whether any changes will be made to the Office of Electricity Regulation's cash limit for 1990–91.
The Director General of the Office of Electricity Regulation is accountable for this vote; I understand that the following changes will be made.The cash limit for class V, vote 8 relating to expenditure by the Office of Electricity Regulation will be reduced by £300,000 from £12,135,000 to £11,835,000 mainly due to a planned slower build-up of staff numbers than originally forecast. The running cost limit will be reduced by £300,000 from £8,455,000 to £8,155,000.
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy whether any changes will be made to his Department's cash limits for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimates, the following changes will be made.The cash limit for class V, vote 2 will be increased by £9,552,000 from £289,010,000 to £298,562,000. This extra provision is required to meet the costs of decommissioning and radiocative waste management operations resulting from the recently announced closure of the steam-generating heavy water reactor at Winfrith.The cash limit for class V, vote 3 will be increased by £800,00 from £39,317,000 to £40,117,000. This extra provision is sought to meet an increase of £550,000 in the cost of the Piper Alpha public inquiry and payments to the Scottish Office and others of £250,000 in connection with the Ocean Odyssey fatal accident inquiry.These increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Electricity Privatisation
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy when the Pathfinder prospectus was issued; and whether it will be made available to Parliament.
The Pathfinder prospectus was issued on Friday 2 November and copies of the prospectus have been placed in the Libraries of each House.
Environment
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if there are any proposals to change t he 1990–91 cash limit or running costs limit for Ordnance Survey.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class VIII, vote 12 will be increased by £1,607,000 from £16,436,000 to £18,043,000. This reflects full take-up of the capital end-year flexibility entitlement announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July. In addition, a presentational change is being made to the way that transactions relating to third party digitising arrangements are shown on the face of class VIII, vote 12. As a consequence the running costs limit for the Department will be increased by £247,000 from £56,946,000 to £57,193,000. The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement.
Woodspring District Council
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he proposes to take in regard to Woodspring district council under part I of the Local Government Act 1988.
My right hon. Friend has today issued a direction under section 14 of the Local Government Act 1988 requiring Woodspring district council to expose certain ground maintenance work to competitive tendering again by 1 November 1991. He has taken this action because he was not satisfied with the response which Woodspring district council made to the notice served on 6 September 1990 under section 13 of the Act.That notice set out the Secretary of State's view that Woodspring district council had acted contrary to the requirement of section 7(7) of the Act (which is that, in awarding a contract, an authority must not act in a manner having the effect or intended or likely to have the effect of restricting, distorting or preventing competition) in that it had failed to include in the draft specification and other draft documents for the ground maintenance contract to be let from 1 January 1990 the detailed information which was necessary for potential tenderers to prepare their tenders.
Hostel Deficit Grant
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on the future of hostel deficit grant.
The resources available for deficit revenue funding of housing association special needs projects are to be more than doubled, from an expected expenditure of £36·5 million in 1990–91 to £60 million in 1991–92 and £95 million in 1992–93.This will enable all existing projects already in receipt of deficit grant or with budget approval to continue to be funded and appropriate new projects, whose capital costs are met through the Housing Corporation, to be funded in the future. It will not, however, enable revenue funding to be available for new projects whose capital costs are met by others or, normally, for existing projects for which deficit grant has not previously been paid.The Housing Corporation will be consulting interested parties on a new determination which would bring this development in policy into effect from 1 April 1991. Meanwhile, it will not normally be approving any budgets for new schemes whose capital costs are not met by the corporation.I am still considering whether HDG could be replaced, within available resources, by a flat-rate allowance. I hope to make an announcement shortly.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he has any changes to announce to his Department's cash limits and running costs limits for 1990–91.
Yes. Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimates (i) the cash limit for class VIII, vote 2 (miscellaneous housing administration and grants) will be increased by £12,185,000 from £98,032,000 to £110,217,000, principally to cover additional payments to the Housing Corporation of £13,500,000 to provide accommodation for single homeless people, and increased funding of £1,500,000 for grants to voluntary organisations for the same purpose. The cash limit increase also includes £2,900,000 to cover additional costs arising on housing, building and construction research as the result of the Building Research Establishment charging its customers full economic costs. These increases are partially offset by savings, the most substantial of which is £4,800,000 for housing action trusts (HATs) following the decision by tenants at Southwark not to proceed with a HAT.(ii) The cash limit for class VIII, vote 5 (central environmental services, etc.) will be increased by £8,504,000 from £357,896,000 to £366,400,000. This is mainly to cover additional grant in aid to the National Rivers Authority of £5,500,000 and an increase of £3,500,000 for grants towards the costs of water supply and sewerage in rural areas. There are a number of offsetting savings within the cash block. A further increase of £600,000 for environmental research is the result of the Building Research Establishment charging its customers full economic costs.(iii) The cash limit for class VIII, vote 6 (royal palaces, Historic Royal Palaces Agency, etc.) will be increased by—95,000 from—149,847,000 to—149,942,000 My Department is taking up £145,000 of its capital end-year flexibility entitlement of £1,319,000 announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July. The £145,000 is for the new property services arrangements for occupied royal palaces. These increases will be partly offset by a saving of £50,000 in respect of grant to the Temple Bar Trust.(iv) The cash limit for class VIII, vote 8 (Department of the Environment: administration) will be increased by £1,151,000 from £156,599,000 to £157,750,000 to enable various environmental initiatives to be taken forward and to cover the cost of administering the community charge system. Additional provision has been reduced by £795,000 in respect of the penalty imposed following a breach of this cash limit in 1989–90. The running costs limit for my Department will be increased by £4,128,000 from £153,458,000 to £157,586,000. Additional running cost provision has been reduced by £558,000 in respect of the penalty imposed following a breach in the Department's running costs limit in 1989–90.(v) The cash limit for class VIII, vote 9 (revenue support grant, payments of national non-domestic rates, etc., England) will be increased by £34,832,000 from £20,009,457,000 to £20,044,289,000 to provide additional funds to cover the higher than anticipated proportion of community charge preparation costs grant which was not claimed by charging authorities in 1989–90. This increase is fully offset by savings on the non cash-limited class VIII, vote 14.(vi) The non-voted cash limit for DOE/UA (urban aid and derelict land reclamation) will be increased by £7,000,000 from £897,666,000 to £904,666,000. The cash limit increase includes £7 million grant in aid to the Black Country development corporation for land acquired for the Black Country spine road. This has been offset by an equivalent reduction in the cash limit for class VII, vote 1. An additional £5,628,000 for local authority derelict land grant is being offset by equivalent savings in the cash block.(vii) The non-voted cash limit for DOE/LACAP (local authority capital and credit approvals) will be reduced by £500,000 from £2,813,560,000 to £2,813,060,000 at the revised estimates scrutiny to reflect a £500,000 PES transfer to DSS from deliverable savings to cover additional rent allowances payable following some transfers of local authority tenanted housing to the private sector.(ix) The net increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Foreign And Commonwealth Affairs
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he proposes to make any change in the British Council's cash limits for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class II, vote 4 (the British Council) will be increased by £1,800,000 from £74,433,000 to £76,233,000. This change is to take full account of the entitlement to end-year flexibility carry-forward announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990, of £1,500,000 and a PES transfer of £300,000 from the Department of Education and Science for payment of United Kingdom fees for TEMPUS students. The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Social Security
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether there have been any changes in the cash limits or running costs limit of his Department for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XIV, vote 6 (housing benefit administration and community charge benefit administration) will be increased by £5,500,000 from £114,464,000 to £119,964,000. The revision takes account of local authorities' additional administrative costs due to the raising of the capital limit for entitlement to housing benefit and community charge benefit from £8,000 to £16,000.Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XIV, vote 7 (administration and miscellaneous services) will be increased by £116,000 from £1,706,259,001) to £1,706,375,000. The revision takes account of a transfer from the Department of Health (class XIII, vote 3) £224,000, a transfer to Scottish Office (class XV, vote 21) £63,000, and a transfer to Inland Revenue (class XVIII, vote 7) £45,000. In addition running cost changes result from a transfer to Department of Health and Social Services (Northern Ireland) for the running costs of the Belfast social security centre and the store for paid orders at Lisahally. There will be a corresponding increase on Department of Health and Social Services (Northern Ireland) vote 3, administration and miscellaneous services. There is also an increase of £1,813,000 to take account of certain variations from previously anticipated patterns of expenditure.As a result of the changes the running costs limit of the Department of Social Security is increased by £850,000 from £1,930,326,000 to £1,931,176,000.These increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
National Insurance
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he has yet completed his review of national insurance contributions for 1991–92.
I have completed the annual review under section 120 of the Social Security Act 1975. My proposals will take effect from 6 April 1991.
Employees and Employers
As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer said in his statement earlier today, I do not propose to change the standard rate of contributions for employees, which will remain at 9 per cent. However, for employers I propose to reduce the standard rate contribution from 10·45 per cent. to 10·4 per cent., and to reduce the lower rate contributions of 5, 7 and 9 per cent.—which apply currently in respect of employees earning up to £175—to 4·6, 6·6 and 8·6 per cent. respectively. These changes go a considerable way towards offsetting the costs to employers of the proposed changes to statutory sick pay which I announced to the House on 24 October.
In line with the Social Security Pensions Act 1975, the lower earnings limit for class 1 contributions is to be raised to £52 a week. This is exactly equal to the basic retirement pension rate for a single person, which I announced to the House on 24 October. The upper earnings limit is to be raised to £390 a week, which is seven and a half times the new basic pension rate as provided by the Social Security Pensions Act. These new earnings limits will replace the current ones of £46 and £350 respectively.
Under the new structure for employees which came into force on 5 October 1989 people whose earnings reach the lower earnings limit will continue to pay an initial contribution of 2 per cent. of that limit and standard rate contributions of 9 per cent. on that portion of their earnings which exceeds the lower but not the upper earnings limit. The present banded system of contributions for employers will continue, although the percentage rates will be reduced as I have already mentioned and the ceilings for the lower rates will be extended further; they will now apply to weekly earnings which fall below the ceilings of £85, £130 and £185 (the previous ceilings were £80, £125 and £175 respectively).
Not contracted-out employees and employers
Neither the employee nor his employer will have to pay any contributions if earnings are less than £52 a week. Those whose earnings do not exceed £350 (the former upper earnings limit) will pay 42p a week less in contributions than at present. This is because a further £6 of their weekly earnings will be subject to a deduction of 2 per cent. rather than 9 per cent. For employees with earnings above £350 a week, the maximum possible increase will be £3·18 a week. Employers' contributions will generally be reduced and some employers will gain further where employees' earnings which were above the former ceilings fall below the new ceilings. Since there is no upper earnings limit for employers' contributions, and as the highest rate of contribution is being decreased, employers of the higher-paid will also pay slightly less than previously.
Contracted-out employees and their employers
Contracted-out employees will gain in the same way. The contributions due from employees earning less than £350 a week will drop by 30p a week. For employees earning over £350 the maximum possible increase will be £2·50 a week. The reduction in rates for employers will offset the usual increase which stems from the raising of the lower earnings limit and means they have to pay at the higher not contracted-out rate on a further £6 of earnings. So contracted-out employers will either pay slightly more or slightly less than at present depending on the level of the employee's earnings. Also there will be gains in respect of lower-paid employees whose earnings fall between the old and new ceilings for reduced rate contributions.
Self-employed people
The flat-rate class 2 contribution will be raised by 60p to £5·15 a week.
The rate of class 4 contributions, currently 6·3 per cent., will not be increased. The annual limits of profits between which class 4 contributions are paid will be raised to £5,900 and £20,280 from £5,450 and £18,200 respectively. Self-employed people who pay only class 2 contributions will pay an extra £31·20 a year in 1991–92.
For people with profits between £5,900 and £18,200 (the former upper profits limit) class 4 contributions will be reduced by £28·35 per year assuming an unaltered level of profits. For those self-employed people with profits at or above the new upper profits limit the annual charge for class 4 contributions will be £102·69 higher.
Class 3 (Voluntary Contributions)
The rate of class 3 contributions will be raised by 60p to £5·05 a week.
National Health Service Allocation
The allocation to the national health service, currently 1·05 per cent. from employees and 0·9 per cent. from employers, will not be changed.
The draft order, together with a report by the Government Actuary, will be laid before Parliament shortly.
P>Health
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what changes he has made to the cash limits and running cost limits of his Department in 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimates, the following changes will be made.The cash limit for class XIII, vote 1 (hospital and community health services, family health services (part) and other services, England) will be increased by £291,932,000 (from £13,902,857,000 to £14,194,789,000). This increase provides an additional £159,484,000 for VAT on construction and other minor capital expenditure; £110,000,000 for the cost of commitments for GPs' practice staff and premises improvements scheme; £23,284,000 for the full take-up of end-year flexibility entitlements arrangements as announced by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990; £1,704,000 for the pay award for senior nurses and midwives; £350,000 for a transfer from class VI, vote 1 for the North London School of Physiotherapy and £56,000 in respect of a transfer from class XIII, vote 3 for the artificial eye service. These increases are partly offset by a transfer of £2,746,000 to class XIII, vote 3 for management communication funding and £200,000 for work done by the Audit Commission.The cash limits for class XIII, vote 3 (Department of Health administration, miscellaneous health services and personal social services, England) will be increased by £3,335,000 (from £687,918,000 to £691,253,000). This increase provides an additional £516,000 for expenditure on VAT on construction; £14,000 for the nurse regrading package and pay award for senior nurses and midwives; £2,746,000 transferred from class XIII, vote 1 in respect of management communication funding; £200,000 transferred from class XIII, vote 1 for work done by the Audit Commission; £100,000 from class II, vote 5, £100,000 from class XI, vote 1, £65,000 from class XVI, vote 1 and £35,000 from Department of Health and Social Services Northern Ireland, vote 3 for contributions to the international Peto institute; and £257,000 from class XII, vote 3 for the United Kingdom drug reduction task force. These increases are partly offset by £224,000 in respect of a net transfer to class XIV, vote 7 for reapportionment of staff resources following the splitting of DHSS; and £56,000 to class XIII, vote 1 in respect of the artificial eye service, and also a reduction of £418,000 for EC receipts for emergency payments for injuries resulting from the storms last winter. The provision for running costs on class XIII, vote 3 and the Department's running cost limit is reduced by £38,000 from £202,087,000 to £202,049,000. The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Scotland
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he proposes to make changes to the cash limits and running costs limit for 1990–91 within his responsibility.
Yes. I intend to make changes to 15 of the cash limits within my responsibility.As a result of higher than expected receipts the cash limit on class XV, vote 3, regional and general industrial support, is being reduced by £1,500,000 from £142,216,000 to £140,716,000. This reduction will partially offset increases in other votes.Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XV, vote 6, roads, transport and environmental services Scotland will be increased by £649,000 from £251,342,000 to £251,991,000. This increase includes full take-up of capital under the end-year flexibility entitlement announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990 at columns
235–38.Provision is also included for advisers' fees arising from the proposed privatisation of passenger transport companies and for a contribution towards the provision of weather radar stations by the Meteorological Office. Both increases are partly offset by corresponding reductions.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XV, vote 8, housing, Scotland will be increased by £9,381,000 from £306,983,000 to £316,364,000 to increase grant in aid provision to Scottish Homes to compensate for the withdrawal of section 20 status under the VAT Act 1983.
The cash limit for class XV, vote 10, privatisation of the electricity supply industry, Scotland will be reduced by £4,500,000 from £14,000,000 to £9,500,000. This reduction partially offsets increases in other votes.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XV, vote 11, administration of justice, Scotland, will be increased by £125,000 from £42,665,000 to £42,790,000 for full take-up of entitlement of the end-year flexibility for running costs announced on 25 July. Accordingly the running cost cash limit is increased by £125,000 from £31,935,000 to £32,060,000.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XV, vote 14, law, order and miscellaneous health services, Scotland will be increased by £81,000 from £155,246,000 to £155,327,000 reflecting the take-up of part of the end-year flexibility entitlement for running costs of £580,000 announced on 25 July.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XV, vote 15, education, arts, libraries and social work, Scotland will be increased by £2,000,000 from £231,975,000 to £233,975,000 to reflect the full take-up of capital end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XV, vote 18, Scottish Record Office will be increased by £66,000 from £2,967,000 to £3,033,000 to reflect full take-up of capital end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XV, vote 19, General Register Office for Scotland, will be increased by £50,000 from £7,571,000 to £7,621,000 to reflect the full take-up of running costs end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July. Accordingly the running costs limit will be increased by £50,000 from £8,341,000 to £8,391,000.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XV, vote 21,Scottish Office administration will be increased by £562,000 from £129,590,000 to £130,152,000. Increased provision reflects the take-up of the remainder of the running costs end-year flexibility entitlement of £580,000 announced on 25 July and will cover the costs of additional work undertaken by the Scottish Office Solicitors Office for the Department of Social Security. The expenditure on behalf of DSS will be offset by a corresponding reduction in the cash limit for class XIV, vote 7 and the Department's running costs limit.
As a result of these changes and the take-up of running costs end-year flexibility entitlement on class XV, vote 14 the running costs limit for the Scottish Office will be increased by £643,000 from £221,954,000 to £222,597,000.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XV, vote 22,revenue and rate support grants, Scotland will be increased by £16,540,000 from £2,479,300,000 to £2,495,840,000. This increase will be met from existing but unallocated public expenditure provision.
The cash limit for class XV, vote 26, privatisation of the Scottish Bus Group will be decreased by £40,000 from £348,000 to £308,000. This reduction will partially offset increases in other votes.
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XV, vote 27, hospital and community health services, family practitioner services (part) and other health services, Scotland will be increased by £45,649,000 from £2,056,114,000 to £2,101,763,000 to cover the costs arising from the termination of VAT refunds on construction; to reinstate a reduction applied to health boards in the original estimate; to cover the costs of commitments for GPs' practice staff; for full take-up of capital end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July; and to cover the additional costs of the senior nurses' and midwives' pay award.
The non-voted cash block SO/LA1, which covers non-housing capital expenditure by local authorities, is to be increased by £5,750,000 from £494,117,000 to £499,867,000 to reflect full take-up of £6,000,000 capital end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July and a reduction of £250,000 to offset increases in other votes.
The non-voted cash limit SO/LA2, which covers housing capital expenditure by local authorities and capital expenditure by new towns, will be increased by £17,007,000 from £330,971,000 to £347,978,000. This increase reflects the full take-up of end-year flexibility entitlement announced on 25 July.
These increases are within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland whether the Lord Advocate proposes any changes to the Crown Office's cash limit.
The cash limit for class X, vote 13 will be increased by £1,512,000 from £26,857,000 to £28,369,000. This is to enable the Crown Office to meet the cost of planned capital works originally provided for in 1989–90 on class XI, vote 14 but which have slipped into 1990–91. Of this increase £1,178,000 comes under end of year flexibility arrangements as announced to the House of Commons by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 25 July 1990 at columns 235–38. The increase is within the forecast outturn for the planning total included in the Chancellor's autumn statement today.
Education And Science
Cash Limits
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on his Department's expenditure plans for 1991–92 to 1993–94.
As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in his statement today, the provision for the Department of Education and Science's own spending programme in 1991–92 will be £7,246 million, which is some £690 million (4 per cent. in real terms) higher than the corresponding plans for 1990–91. This figure includes central Government expenditure on higher education, science, and schools; it also includes specific grants to local education authorities and credit approvals for capital expenditure by LEAs.In addition, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment announced on 31 October proposals for the local authority settlement for 1991–92 which allow for a total of £17,485 million to be spent by LEAs on schools, colleges and other education services. That figure is over £2,400 million higher than the corresponding figure for 1990–91.These two settlements, taken together, reflect the priority which the Government have given to education within their overall spending plans, and will provide an excellent basis for carrying forward our policies to raise standards and increase choice in the schools and to increase participation in higher education.
Local authority current expenditure
The Government's spending plans allow for local authorities in England to spend £17,485 million on schools, colleges and other education services. This is over £2,400 million or 16 per cent. higher than education's share of the 1990–91 grant settlement.
This increase recognises the role of schools and colleges in giving effect to our education reforms. Teachers and others are working hard to get the reforms into place, and good progress is being made. So long as LEAs, schools and colleges manage their resources effectively and efficiently, I am confident that the £17·5 billion total allocated to local authority education will be sufficient to achieve the further improvements we all wish to see.
Specific Grants
Within the £17·5 billion total, the Government will be supporting £36·4 million of spending through the grants for education support and training (GEST) programme. For 1991–92 the programme, which brings together the existing education support grants and LEA training grants, is focused on the education reforms, which account for over £270 million of the available expenditure compared to £190 million in the current year. In addition to the £17·5 billion total, which includes £118 million for the careers service, LEAs will continue to receive grant from the Department of Employment for the technical and vocational education initiative.
Schools
Nearly £14 billion of the £17·5 billion will be spent on schools and school-related supported services. We are assuming a small increase in primary and secondary teacher numbers to just over 400,000. This will mean the continuation of the record low pupil:teacher ratio of one teacher to every 17 pupils. We are also assuming an increase in spending on school support staff to assist teachers in their work.
The pupil: teacher ratio in special schools is assumed to fall further to 4:8:1 to allow for staffing support for pupils with special educational needs.
For the great bulk of education funding, it is for LEAs and, under local management, their schools and colleges, to decide how best to deploy available resources. But the grant settlement allows for them to give particular priority to increased spending on school books and equipment and school repairs and maintenance.
Local Authority Further and Higher Education
The settlement reflects the buoyant trend of enrolments in LEA colleges, allowing for 677,000 full-time equivalent students on further education (FE) courses, and 43,000 on higher education courses. That includes a 7 per cent. increase in the participation rate in full-time FE courses by 16 and 17-year olds between 1989–90 and 1991–92. The FE staff:student ratio is assumed to rise from 10:7:1 in 1989–90 to 10:9:1 in 1991–92 as colleges continue to improve their efficiency. But the plans incorporate real increases in spending on college administrative and clerical staff, on books and equipment, and on repairs and maintenance.
Capital Expenditure in Schools and Colleges
In 1991–92 annual capital guidelines for local authority capital expenditure on schools in England will total £472 million. This compares with £410 million in 1990–91, an increase of 15 per cent. Building and repair grants to voluntary aided schools will be £130 million, which represents an increase of 21 per cent. over 1990–91 provision. An additional £2 million will be provided for grant-maintained schools.
These increases—providing for total expenditure of over £600 million on school buildings—demonstrate the Government's commitment, within overall constraints on public expenditure, to continued improvement in the school building stock. The plans allow for the growing demand for new school places in areas of population growth; the capital costs of removing surplus places elsewhere; building work needed for effective implementation of the national curriculum; and for equipping colleges to meet the skill requirements of the 1990s. Local education authorities can supplement annual capital guidelines from capital receipts and from revenue sources, and are free to decide themselves within their available resources what level of capital expenditure to devote to education.
Higher Education
Compared with the level in the present year, total available public funds for higher education are planned to increase by some 10 per cent. in 1991–92 and by over 18 per cent. by 1993–94. Spending on higher education will exceed £4 billion for the first time in 1991–92.
These plans will enable the universities, polytechnics and colleges to provide for the record numbers now wanting to enter higher education as the Government's education reforms take effect. More than one in five of all 18-year-olds are expected to enter higher education from next year, compared with only one in eight at the end of the 1970s. The table sets out the detailed projections of student numbers on which the new expenditure plans are based.
After adjustments to earlier plans to allow for higher tuition fees in October 1991, the additional funding in 1991–92 compared with earlier plans for that year comprises mainly:
(a) an extra £175 million for the two funding councils to distribute to universities, polytechnics and colleges—£42·5 million of it for building improvements and equipment; and (b) an extra £110 million for tutition fees, paid for those who qualify through mandatory student awards.
This may allow a small increase in academic staff complements as student numbers increase (by a projected 5 per cent. for full-time and sandwich course students in academic year 1991–92), but the scale of any such increase will depend on the extent to which cost increases, and particularly pay increases, can be contained. Universities, polytechnics and colleges will, in any case, need to make significant efficiency gains in particular by continuing to develop more effective provision for teaching.
These plans confirm that the Government are providing for the cost of the extra students enrolled beyond the earlier planned numbers as well as for an increase in resources for the funding councils. Universities, polytechnics and colleges remain free to take on, and finance through the tuition fee, as many qualified students as they are able to accommodate. The level of fees which will be reimbursed through public funds in 1991–92 will be up to these limits:
- Classroom-based subjects £1,775
- Laboratory/workshop-based subjects £2,650
- Clinical medicine, dentistry, and veterinary science £4,770
Universities
The plans allow for an increase over earlier plans, excluding the fees for extra students, of £107 million in 1991–92 for recurrent and capital funding for the universities. They will also benefit from extra income from tuition fees expected to average some £2,280 for every additional student enrolled beyond the Government's earlier plans. Total planned available recurrent funding in 1991–92 is just over 9·5 per cent. higher than the expected level in 1990–91.
After taking account of the shift of resources from recurrent funding to higher differential tuition fees in respect of students allowed for in the Government's earlier plans, and of the transfer of the work of the Computer Board (apart from supercomputing which transfers to the Advisory Board for the Research Councils), the total available for recurrent funding in 1991–92 to the Universities Funding Council will be £1,599 million. As envisaged in earlier plans, this includes £20 million for the continuing cost of new academic appointments following the three-year restructuring programme. It will be for the vice-chancellors to determine what can be afforded for academic pay having regard to other cost increases, the scope for efficiency improvements and the need for additional staff. The Government expect the 1991 pay settlement for academic staff to incorporate further flexibility and differentiation; and are considering further whether to hold back an element of grant for release only in the event of a satisfactory settlement.
The plans for 1992–93 and 1993–94 allow for the transfer of resources to the science budget, as explained in my separate statement today about a new boundary for dual support for science.
Capital funding for universities will be £10 million a year more than previously planned so as to provide for additional equipment for teaching and for necessary improvements in animal houses.
Polytechnics and colleges
The plans allow for an increase, excluding the fees for extra students, of some £68·5 million in 1991–92 for recurrent and capital funding for the polytechnics and colleges. They will also benefit from tuition fee income expected to average £2,174 per student for every additional student enrolled beyond the Government's earlier plans. Total planned available recurrent funding in 1991–92 is 10 per cent higher than the expected level in 1990–91.
After taking account of the shift of resources to higher differential tuition fees in respect of students allowed for in the Government's earlier plans, recurrent funding available to the PCFC in 1991–92 will be £870 million. As envisaged in last year's plans, this includes the final tranche of £5 million for the agreed restructuring programme and a final small tranche of £2 million for contingencies for transitional problems and liabilities. It will be for the polytechnics and college employers to determine what can be afforded for academic pay having regard to other cost increases, the scope for efficiency improvements and the need for additional staff. The Government expect the 1990 and 1991 pay settlements to achieve greater flexibility in the use of academic staff time and other improvements in conditions of employment within the resources available for 1990–91 and now announced for 1991–92; and are considering further whether to hold back an element of grant in 1991–92 for release only in the event of a satisfactory pay settlement in 1991.
Higher education: projected student numbers
| ||||
000s
| ||||
Academic years
| ||||
1990–91
| 1991–92
| 1992–93
| 1993–94
| |
Students in Great Britain higher education
| ||||
| Full-time and Sandwich | ||||
| Home | 642·0 | 674·0 | 686·0 | 685·0 |
| Part-time (including OU) | 401·0 | 406·0 | 408·0 | 409·0 |
| Total FTE1 (PT=0·35) | 849·0 | 885·0 | 898·0 | 899·0 |
| Age Participation Index | 18·6 | 20·3 | 21·0 | 21·6 |
Home students in the UFC and PCFC sectors
| ||||
| UFC | ||||
| Home Full-time and Sandwich | 298·0 | 312·0 | 320·0 | 322·0 |
| Home part-time | 49·0 | 50·0 | 50·0 | 51·0 |
| Total FTE1 (PT=0·35) | 315·0 | 330·0 | 338·0 | 340·0 |
| PCFC | ||||
| Home Full-time and Sandwich | 281·0 | 297·0 | 300·0 | 298·0 |
| Home part-time | 137·0 | 140·0 | 140·0 | 140·0 |
| Total FTE1 (PT=0·35) | 329·0 | 346·0 | 349·0 | 347·0 |
1 FTE: Full Time Equivalent. | ||||
Capital funding for polytechnics and colleges will be nearly £35 million a year more than previously planned so as to provide for priority building improvements and additional equipment for teaching.
For both sectors, the plans allow for funding council running costs including those associated with their move to Bristol in 1991–92.
Student Support
The plans allow for total provision of £1,015 million in 1991–92 to cover the costs of student support. This sum will meet the cost of grants at the 1990–91 academic year levels for the higher number of students now projected, and will allow for the uprating of student loans in line with the previously announced policy. Further details will be announced in due course.
Science
Provision for the DES science programme, including expenditure financed by EC receipts, will be £928 million in 1991–92, £1,030 million in 1992–93 and £1,113 million in 1993–94. The figure for 1991–92 takes account of the rescheduling of postgraduate tuition fees from annual to termly payments, which results in a reduced requirement of £8 million for that year only. In addition expenditure on the Antarctic research ship RRS James Clark Ross, which was provided as an earmarked addition to science funding, and on the relocation of the research councils' headquarters to Swindon will be substantially lower in 1991–92 than in 1990–91. The increased provision in 1991–92 will preserve the real value of the science budget once these factors have been taken into account.
The figures for 1992–93 and 1993–94 include additions of £50 million and £100 million in those two years to reflect the change in the balance of funding responsibilities between higher education institutions and the research councils from August 1992. From that date the grants made to higher education institutions by research councils will cover the full costs of research, except for academic salaries and premises costs. It is possible that further adjustments will be made next year.
I am inviting the Advisory Board for the Research Councils to advise me on the distribution of these resources that will best advance the Government's aims for civil science in the interests of the nation as a whole.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he has any changes to announce to cash limits on votes within his responsibility for 1990–91.
Subject to parliamentary approval to the necessary supplementary estimates, the cash limit for class XI, vote 1, schools, research and miscellaneous services, and class XI, vote 5, science, will be amended as follows:
| Class and vote Current cash limit | Change | Revised cash limit | |
| £ | £ | £ | |
| XI.1 | 653,341,000 | +4,309,000 | 657,650,000 |
| XI.5 | 897,147,000 | +5,184,000 | 902,331,000 |
Research Councils
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will make a statement on the responsibilities of research councils for funding research in institutions of higher education.
In January this year my Department issued a consultation paper proposing a change in the way in which research supported by the research councils in universities, polytechnics and other higher education institutions is funded. In the light of the responses to that paper and other consultation, I have decided that there should be a change in the respective responsibilities of the councils and the institutions for funding such research, with effect from 1 August 1992.I have today written to the chairmen of the Advisory Board for the Research Councils, the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals, the Committee of Directors of Polytechnics, the Standing Conference of Principals and the Universities and Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Councils telling them of my decision. The full text of my letter to the chairman of the Advisory Board for the Research Councils is as follows:
- Sir David Phillips FRS
- Chairman
- Advisory Board for the Research Councils
- Elizabeth House
- London SE1 7PH / 8 November 1990
Dear Sir David
Changes in the Balance of the Dual Support System
The Department issued a consultation paper in January proposing an adjustment to the boundary of funding responsibilities between the Research Councils and Higher Education Institutions. It was proposed that, from the beginning of the 1991–92 academic year, the Research Councils should become responsible for meeting all the costs of the projects they fund, apart from academic salaries and premises costs. The purpose of the change was to clarify the respective responsibilities of the Councils and the institutions for supporting Council sponsored research.
The Board was consulted further in September on the detailed implications of the proposal, in the light of the responses, to the January paper. I am most grateful for its advice. In the light of that, and of other responses to consultation, I have concluded that clarification of the funding boundary is necessary and that to achieve it there should be a transfer of funding responsibilites. I accept the Board's advice that more time is needed if we are to have a smooth and effective transfer, and I have therefore decided that the new arrangements should be introduced from the start of the 1992–93 academic year.
Under the new arrangements the Research Councils will meet the full costs of research they support, apart from the costs associated with the employment of permanent academic staff of the institution and general premises costs; these will continue to be the responsibility of the institution. Research Council grants will cover the full direct costs of projects (apart from the costs of academic staff), and will include a contribution to the indirect costs of the institution through a standard percentage addition to direct costs.
The arrangements will apply from 1 August 1992 to newly approved Research Council funded research in Higher Education Institutions, and (subject to transitional provisions) to projects in progress at that date.
I should like to take this opportunity, through the Board, to invite the Research Councils to work with the representatives of the higher education institutions and with the Department to draw up a detailed specification of the new boundary, to make their own assessments of the costs of the additional responsiblities it would entail, and to put in place new grant application arrangements in time for an orderly and effective transfer of responsibilities in 1992. I am also inviting the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals, in consultation with the Department and the Research Councils to undertake further work on research costs and in particular on the percentage addition to be used in dertermining the Councils' contribution to indirect costs.
I should be grateful for a report on the Councils' work by next April, when I will need to be satisfied that good progress has been made in drawing up the detailed specification of the boundary and in putting in place new grant application arrangements.
The Government's public expenditure plans for education and science which I am announcing separately today allow for our current best estimate that the cost of the additional responsibilities transferring to the Research Councils might amount to about £100 million in a full year. I will consider next year, in the light of the further work I am now requesting and of changes in the volume and cost of Research Council sponsored work in the interim, whether any further adjustment is necessary.
Yours sincerely,
K. Clarke
Kenneth Clarke