Termination of Existing Arrangements

Part of Clause 1 – in the House of Commons at 7:15 pm on 10 December 1986.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr James Pawsey Mr James Pawsey , Rugby and Kenilworth 7:15, 10 December 1986

Even if we accept what the hon. Gentleman said, we are still talking in terms of another £45 million. Even then, as he knows, that is not the end of the difference between the two sides. Arguments about conditions of service still have not been resolved. The hon. Gentleman should understand that the increase proposed by my right hon. Friend amounts to about 16·5 per cent. In anybody's language, that is a substantial increase. I am amazed that we do not have more agreement from Labour Members on these major points.

The hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Barnett) made much the same point. He appeared to forget the 16·5 per cent. increase and the £600 million. He also forgot the talks and protracted negotiations which have gone on month in and month out. They have not brought any solution.

The hon. Gentleman referred to centralisation. He chose to forget circular 10/65. He chose to forget the Education Act 1976 which was passed when he was a member of the Government. I shall refresh his memory. That Act was centralist in the most extreme form. It took away the right of local education authorities to decide their own form of education. It said, "Whether thou likes it or not, thou shalt go comprehensive." God knows, many of our children have regretted that decision. That decision was made by his colleague, known to us as Shirl the Pearl in the days when she was more Socialist than Democrat. I remind the Member for Greenwich that we shall not take any lectures on centralisation from him or from his Opposition colleagues.