Å®ÉúСÊÓƵ

In the first science debate in the House of Commons for two years, Jack
Straw, Labour’s shadow education secretary, accused the government of ‘failing
properly or sufficiently to fund the science base’. Kenneth Clarke, the
education secretary, disagreed. ‘We have a strong science base in Britain,’
he said.

Opening the debate on a motion condeming the government’s handling of
science and science education, Straw promised that a Labour government would
insulate the science budget from inflationary pressures.

Straw also attacked the government for lacking a science culture. ‘The
government’s recognition of the importance of science is a token one,’ he
said. He accused Clarke of failing to fund the science base properly, suppressing
the advice of the Advisory Board to the Research Councils, neglecting the
supply of science teachers and failing to provide a European dimension.

In his reply, Clarke emphasised the success of the government’s reforms
in education. ‘Any serious long-term policy for science must begin by securing
an adequate supply of new, highly qualified, scientists and engineers,’
said Clarke. By putting science, mathematics and technology in the National
Curriculum and by increasing the number of science graduates, the government
was securing that supply.

Doug Hoyle, the Labour MP whose constituency is next to the NSF, said:
‘Leaving the present government in charge of scientific matters is like
leaving Dracula in charge of a ward full of anaemics.’.