---

Finance (No. 2) Bill

I am sure that there are things on which the hon. Gentleman and I disagree, but we seem to have some points of agreement in this debate. What has been done to improve the viability of education as an export? The basic argument is the same: investment in primary schools is what matters. In my constituency, we have two new primary schools, one in Westerhope and one in Gosforth. They are excellent examples of the best facilities from which young people can benefit. Investment in secondary schools will also show returns. As it happens, I do not agree with some of the structural arguments that the Government have put forward, but I agree on the emphasis on putting resources into secondary schools. The Chancellor said in his Budget speech that every school in the country should aim to have the same achievements, whether in the public or private sector. That can help to drive a great improvement in our people’s ability to benefit from education throughout the community. Items in the Budget such as waiving further education fees for A-level students up to 25 years old are also an important development. The second area in which there is scope for new opportunity is medical exports. As a nation, we are a world leader in many medical technologies and their application. We should be not only providing more opportunities for people to be treated in Britain, but driving the infrastructure that supports our health service. Biotechnology is a very important science in Newcastle. The university of Newcastle is a world leader in stem cell research—an area in which I believe that many future medical advances will be based, dealing with a host of problems. There should be more investment in such research. Some people say, ““It is all very well having investment in stem cell research, including on academics, but what about everyone else?”” There are opportunities for others. If we develop a personal DNA, as a lot of scientists and medical people suggest we should—