Education and Skills Bill
Public Bill Committee, 29 January 2008.
Further written evidence to be reported to the House
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
I welcome all colleagues to this evidence-taking session of the Public Bill Committee considering the Education and Skills Bill. On behalf of all Members, I extend a particularly warm welcome to the three wise men—the three college principals who are our first witnesses this morning. I ask them to introduce themselves briefly and formally before going straight into questioning. Over to you.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you. We have until no later than 11.30 am—there are very strict timelines—for your evidence, which we look forward to hearing. I am going to start with the Conservative Front-Bench spokesman, John Hayes.
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
The Association of Colleges gave evidence to this Committee on 22 January, as I am sure you know. I asked them what they felt about the new duty placed on colleges to promote good attendance. Sue Dutton of the association saw this duty as an extension to collect information on education maintenance allowances. Her view was that:
“It is obviously onerous on institutions to have to collect that level of detail,”——[Official Report, Education and Skills Public Bill Committee, 22 January 2008; c. 28, Q69.]
How do you interpret the duty contained in the Bill to promote good attendance? How will colleges work with local education authorities to enforce these arrangements —are you resourced, geared up and staffed specifically to do this job?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
So what you are really saying is that the Association of Colleges representatives are wrong and this provision is not onerous? Perhaps you might comment further and say whether they are right about the Connexions database, which they say is not fit for purpose in these terms. I appreciate that your college is exceptional in this regard—I have visited and it is a model of good practice—but this duty is going to apply to all colleges. Is the Association of Colleges wrong about the Connexions database not being fit for purpose and about this duty being onerous? This is not about promoting the best; it is about what you have to do in every case.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Mr. Pryce, would you like to add something?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
May I move on, Mr. Bercow?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Yes, please do.
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
I am very grateful for your legendary and typical indulgence.
The Government, as you will know, said in a document published yesterday, that companies such as McDonald’s will be allowed to issue their own qualifications. The Foster report of 2005 talked about a galaxy of oversight bodies in the further education sector—17. Given the new obligations in this Bill and the, hopefully, central role FE will play in extending educational opportunity for people from 16 onwards, do FE colleges have the autonomy they need to develop strong links with business and their communities? Do you feel that the machinery of government changes have been helpful in respect of funding in particular? Would you like to see a move to greater self-regulation?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
The AOC has been quoted already this morning on a couple of occasions. They said to us that colleges already concentrate on the hard to reach and on widening participation by young people. I do not think that is desperately controversial, but in the Bill we are chasing after perhaps the last 10 per cent. who are not participating. How well placed do you think colleges are to respond to that challenge to raise the participation rate for that last 10 per cent., and to respond to the adult skills elements of the Bill?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Is that a bid for capital funding?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Thank you. I noted what you said, Paul, that you thought compulsion would make a mindset difference. I wonder whether our other two witnesses agree on welcoming compulsion and why they have formed the view that they have, whatever it is.
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
I have a final question related to that, on information, advice and guidance. I agree with you: we must make sure the culture continues to be one of support rather than blame. What role do colleges have in IAG for young people to fulfil the duty in future? Specifically, do you think they should have a duty to provide impartial careers education along the lines we have described?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
If you think that it is already vital and it is already there, do you think that it is necessary to have a duty on colleges to do it?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Thank you very much. I wish that calling three such fine witnesses had been my idea.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you. I now call David Laws, to be followed by Sarah McCarthy-Fry, to be followed by Oliver Heald, and I have sight of other Members as well.
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Perhaps I can tempt you into upsetting Jim instead of pleasing him. Jim asked a question which led to some discussion about capital bids and capital costs. Looking at the Government’s assessment of what all this is going to cost, the provision that has been made for additional capital costs for the further education sector is quite modest. It is £5.3 million per year or something like £90 million over 15 or 20 years. Does that sound realistic?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Obviously, the characteristics of the group of youngsters who need to be included in employment, education and training once the Bill has gone through are quite wide ranging, but a lot of them have extremely high needs such as mental health needs, special educational needs, and needs stemming from drug and alcohol abuse. They may also be young parents and so forth. One suspects that a lot of those youngsters will not end up in the employment environment as a consequence of the Bill, but they will end up coming heavily through your type of institution and others. Do you have any concerns about coping with some of those youngsters? Do any of them have needs such that they would be better coped with in a different way from that set out in this Bill?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
I appreciate that you have a lot of experience of working with youngsters with quite challenging needs. Possibly—and one anticipates this will be the case—the group of youngsters who will be swept into the education and training system as a consequence of this Bill will take in even more challenging youngsters. Can you think of any people who would need some other type of setting initially to deal with their needs rather than an education and training setting? In other words, would other problems, including medical problems, need to be resolved first before it was accepted that the college setting was the right one for them?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
So you do not think that the unit costs of this latest group of youngsters who will potentially be swept into colleges, taking into account all their needs, will be higher than the existing average of your students?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
I have one final, brief question, which comes back to Mr. Hayes’s point about absenteeism. In year 11, the persistent absenteeism figure is between 10 and 11 per cent., as you know. For youngsters on school action plus across the system, it is about 20 per cent. Are you as confident as you indicated earlier, that you will not see a bit of a spike in absenteeism rates once people are brought in on a compulsory basis, rather than through the current system of voluntarism?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
I am sorry to interrupt, but we are now more than halfway through the time allotted for questioning these witnesses. That is fine—we have had some very good exchanges—but I appeal to colleagues to ask pithy questions, and to witnesses to provide extremely succinct answers, and only to provide answers when they feel it is essential to do so, then everybody will get in.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
An excellent piece of leadership, for which we are all extremely grateful.
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
In my constituency, one of the things that colleges and schools have noticed is that the drop-out rate within the first six months, or even the first year, is higher than they would like. Do you think that that is because they are not getting the proper advice and guidance from the schools—you hinted at this, saying that you think things will improve with the duty on the schools to do that—or do you think it is because they do not like the environment in college? At the moment, if they choose to drop out, it is not really your responsibility, although I am sure that many colleges try to encourage students not to drop out. However, when we bring compulsion into it, will you consider it more of a responsibility than you already have, or do you think it goes back to getting the right advice and guidance to make sure that the students are on the right course in the first place?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
That is exactly where I want to come in. Many youngsters who do not learn to read end up bunking off. We know that 40,000 youngsters each year leave school unable to read, write or add up properly, and we know that the persistent truanting in year 11 is about 11 per cent.—that is more than 60,000 young people.
I am worried about forcing youngsters who have not learned to read, write and add up, to stay on at school, or go to college, or have some work-based training forced on them, when really it is the system that has failed them. If you have been in statutory education for 10 to 12 years and not been taught to read, write and add up, assuming that you do not have special needs or anything of that sort, it is just a huge failing. I worry about forcing these people to go on and on, to nil effect. Would you like to comment on that?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
But how do you get them to read and write?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
How can you work in the building industry without a site certificate?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
I completely agree, but of course it is voluntary—they want a job, they like the work environment, they need that certificate to work, so it encourages them. Is compulsion the answer?
Nia Griffith (Labour, Llanelli)
We talked about guidance, and the prejudice in schools that results from the fact that the ordinary teaching staff—not the professional careers staff—have very little experience of anything outside the school, so the advice is not very broad. I would like to look at the advice within the colleges and ask about gender stereotyping. Do you think additional guidance is needed to ensure that young women are given the full range of options and not thought unsuitable for certain areas of training?
Nia Griffith (Labour, Llanelli)
On the issue of compulsion, I was very interested to hear Paul Head’s comments about it being as much about state recognition as about the practical implications, because you are already doing so much. As teachers, college lecturers and, dare I say it, politicians, we tend to bend over backwards to blame ourselves and do everything that we possibly can. Do you accept that there are some young people who are just so lazy that they will not get out of bed and need the occasional kick? Having taken on the idea of compulsion, how do we deal with sanctions? What should they be? How do you see any part of the sanction process fitting into your role?
Angela Watkinson (Conservative, Upminster)
The additional students who will attend your colleges and are targeted by the legislation are the ones least likely to stay on post-16 at the moment, so they will be high-maintenance, perhaps with complex social backgrounds, special needs, or learning difficulties. How do you envisage the impact on your budgets of the additional teaching staff, learning spaces and equipment?
Madeleine Moon (Labour, Bridgend)
I would like to take up the issue of local and regional qualifications. How grave a risk do you see in those being developed, and should there be something in the Bill requiring qualifications to be widely available? I would also like to ask about transition. We have done a lot of work, and recognised the importance of the transition from primary to secondary school. A huge amount of effort has gone in to making sure that that transition is eased. Do we need to take into account the importance of the transition for 14 to 19-year-olds to the adult world of work, adult responsibilities and expectations? Is the unique thing that you offer that 10 per cent.—and I am very impressed by your comments about not giving up on students and the importance of building aspiration—a crucial opportunity to ease the transition into the adult world and adult responsibilities? Do you help them to deal with those things, given that they have not had the role models and the experience on their journey so far?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
I have met scores of college principals—perhaps hundreds—since I have been doing this job, and I have yet to meet one who thinks that the current funding and management arrangements through the Learning and Skills Council is the best way to do the job. Why do college principals tell me that?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
Like the LSC?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
So it does not work? Will you give a straight answer?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you. There any no further questions, so I should like warmly to thank Paul Head, Ian Pryce and Ioan Morgan for sparing their time to give evidence this morning. We are very grateful.
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
The three wise men.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Yes, as I observed earlier. It is always good to have one’s views endorsed by a Minister, even if it is from a sedentary position.
Madeleine Moon (Labour, Bridgend)
Two of the wise men have Welsh antecedents.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Indeed, two of the wise men were Welsh. That may or may not be recorded for posterity. Thank you, Madeleine. Thank you, colleagues.
I welcome our next set of witnesses. Perhaps I can ask you to introduce yourselves formally, and then we will move into the questioning process.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you. We start this session three minutes early, which is good. We have until no later than 12.15 pm for your evidence. I turn to Nick Gibb to open the questioning.
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Thank you for giving evidence, it is very much appreciated. Your response to the question in the consultation document asking whether you agreed that there was a case for introducing compulsory participation, was a bold-typed “No”. Will you expand on that opinion, please?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Mr. Ehmann, do you want to come in on the point about small employers?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Will you expand on that further? Alison Wolf, when she gave evidence the other day, set out her analysis of how the regulatory impact assessment was wrong. Do you have a similar analysis that you can share with the Committee?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Thank you, I would like you to do that later, if we can come back to you on that. Do you have an opinion about the youth market, the employability of 16 and 17-year-olds and the impact the legislation could have on that market?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Ehmann?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
I was a director of a small business, employing roughly a couple of dozen staff, for a number of years before becoming a Member of Parliament. When we took on new members of staff we would always have a discussion with them as part of induction about what their induction, support and training needs may be. Do you think that I was unusual, or is that commonplace among employers?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
You are answering a slightly different question about the effect on the youth labour market. I am asking whether there are that many employers—and I would be interested in your source if it is not from your members—who do not have some form of induction when a new member of staff starts working for them?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Is it reasonable to suggest that, for those employers who have a conversation when a member of the work force starts work with them, as part of that conversation they could ask them a couple of questions about how they are planning to fulfil their duty to participate in education or training up to the age of 18?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
But in terms of fulfilling the duty in the Bill, they would be sufficient, would they not?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
So if the guidance issued once the Bill was enacted—should it be agreed by Parliament—made it clear that the bureaucracy surrounding the piece of paper you talk about was minimal, and if the guidance was clear about what kind of ongoing burdens there were on employers to monitor that process and that they would be kept to a minimum, could you then be sufficiently happy that you could see the benefits of increasing the level of training and skills in the work force? Would that change the balance of your opinion?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
What is the deal breaker?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Finally, let me just turn to that question because I am interested in the answer. Clearly, you think the priority of resources should be pre-16 rather than post-16, which is not an unreasonable position to take, but is it not reasonable to ask Government to do both—to tackle pre-16 education and make sure that we are ever improving the standards of literacy and numeracy and work readiness of people when they get to the age of 16, and to try to address their engagement and their level of skills post-16?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
I agree with you on that. I just disagree with you about one or the other.
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
In your exchanges with Mr. Gibb, you were talking about the risk to the work force and to the employment prospects of 16 and 17-year-olds, and you talked about the regulatory impact assessment. What would be the maximum impact in lost jobs for 16 or 17-year-olds, in terms of those who are presently not getting the training that would meet the requirements of the Bill?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
In its paper on the Bill, which it sent us some time ago, the CBI used a figure of about 65,000 as the total number in employment but without certified training. Does that sound like the right number?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
In terms of the sectors where youngsters are likely to be employed, but are not necessarily getting the training that they need—we have had the publicity yesterday about certification with McDonald’s and other employers—would it be possible to provide qualifications and certify those in the workplace for many of those youngsters and employers, or does the size or nature of the employers mean that that would be extremely difficult or impossible?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Do you think it would be difficult for that sector to develop a means of training and certification that could be used even by smaller employers?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
If we do not persuade Jim that all of his big proposals on compulsion and criminalisation are wrong, and he does not change his mind, but you manage to strip out some of the policing elements from the Bill that put duties on employers to regulate and check up—elements that therefore present a risk to employers that they will get it all wrong—what sort of amendments would you want to see to those parts of the Bill? To what extent do you think they would reduce the employment risk you talked about earlier? Or would they be drowned out by the smaller employers not wanting to have anything to do with the process of releasing people to do qualifications, or of providing them in the workplace?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
So if we got rid of some of that obligation on employers, it would considerably reduce your fears about employment consequences.
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
May I ask what proportion of your membership are directors of small and medium-sized enterprises?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
So it is about seven in 10, hence your focus. Is not the challenge to strike a balance between what the Government or other agencies do about skills and training for SMEs, and the practical problems that you have touched on? Do you have any initial comments on the new proposals that the Government brought forward yesterday to support SMEs through the skills and training process, particularly the proposals to provide some subsidy to employers who are prepared to go down that route?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
May I probe you a little on the balance between what training employers can be expected to deliver and what training or education must come from elsewhere? Again, we saw in the media yesterday many comments in a different context on building in-house training into broader qualification frameworks. Is not that sort of in-house training something that small and medium-sized enterprises can be expected to do, particularly with the support that is being offered?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
What about the employer’s responsibility to allow time for or to structure the working day around agreed training? You referred to problems with that, but is not it the case that further education colleges and other specialist colleges are being much more flexible about the hours when they deliver training?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
Is that not the case generally in patterns of employment, not just with young people?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
Indeed. I accept that point, but I put it to you that it does not put a disproportionate burden on employers in respect of young people compared with other age groups.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Several colleagues have indicated to me that they want to ask questions. I shall go first to Charles Walker and then to David Lammy, but I have sight of other colleagues who have indicated their interest.
Charles Walker (Conservative, Broxbourne)
What are the commercial barriers that prevent more SMEs from offering apprenticeships to 16 and 17-year-olds?
Charles Walker (Conservative, Broxbourne)
Small businesses are not social enterprises at the end of the day; they have to turn a profit. Is there concern among small businesses that offering apprenticeships would not be cost-effective for them in the long term?
Charles Walker (Conservative, Broxbourne)
I am probing you on this issue because most people who run small businesses are commercially rational; they make rational decisions as far as their businesses are concerned. Surely if they felt that apprenticeships would advance their profitability and enable them to grow their business, they would be investing in them. It would seem they are not investing in them because they are not convinced that there is a commercial advantage to investing in them. We can beat around the bush and dress this up as nicely as we like, but if apprenticeships were more commercially viable, more businesses would be offering them.
Charles Walker (Conservative, Broxbourne)
Do you think offering some form of financial incentive genuinely will increase the number of apprenticeships?
Charles Walker (Conservative, Broxbourne)
Do you think what a business tells you and what a business thinks in private might be different?
Charles Walker (Conservative, Broxbourne)
I think most businesses would say, “Yes, we passionately believe in training. That is something we really value, but we don’t do it, for these reasons.” Do you think they genuinely believe in it or is that what they feel you want to hear?
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
Just for clarity, when you say that they might not have the resources to invest in apprenticeships, do you mean resources beyond just the financial ones and including the means to deal with the administration and the qualifications that come about as a result of apprenticeships?
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
For that reason, although apprenticeships must of course have a work-based element, do you have a view on whether the contract should lie with the employer or with the training provider that the employer is working with, or do you support the flexibility of the current arrangement, under which it is up to the employer?
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
That is a bit surprising, because although you say that you have members who might be concerned about the administration that goes with apprenticeships, including members who are SMEs, presumably you would favour their choosing to have the apprentice working in their premises and so on, but with the training provider dealing with some elements of the bureaucracy, and all the rest of it.
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
Earlier, you talked about your members wanting to see 16-year-olds with the appropriate literacy, numeracy and other skills. Do you recognise that two thirds of the 2020 work force are adults now and therefore would you support the aspects of the Bill that support proper provision and a duty to provide facilities for adults?
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
I do not know the demography of your membership, although it might be quite interesting to find out. We have heard evidence from organisations including Barnardo’s and the Prince’s Trust about some young people in this country who are living chaotic lives—young people whose parents have drug and addiction problems and young people in care. Do you accept that there will always be a cohort of young people—including those arriving in this country at 14 or 15 from other countries, seeking asylum—whose needs can sometimes be met in FE post-16 and who require some of the elements in the Bill? We do not all live in a leafy shire where it is all wonderful at 16.
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
So you support the status quo?
Madeleine Moon (Labour, Bridgend)
Could you clarify for me the research you have done that leads you to say that investment in primary education rather than where this Bill is taking us would make the difference, so that by the time people came through primary education and were coming up to 16, we would not have the problems that we have now, with some young people who have disengaged or who lack the skills and the capacity to engage in the world of work and who need the help and support that this Bill gives them to make that transition into the world of work? Is this based on gut reaction, or have you done some research and what would you want to be changed in the primary curriculum that you think would actually prepare people for that world of work?
Madeleine Moon (Labour, Bridgend)
You said that members of the institute were very committed to training and you had some concerns about the amount of time that smaller employers in particular might have to give to supporting young people when they first come into their employment. Would you not accept that one of the great comments that was made by the college principals was about the importance of partnership and the work that they as college principals had been doing with small employers and with local authorities and their economic development units to make sure that the advice and guidance that the smaller employers you say are worried about is actually there, so the problems you are anticipating in terms of time commitment should not arise? Is it not about partnership—working together to make sure that those skills and the support is there for young people—rather than employers standing on their own and feeling they are isolated and at risk?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you. At the moment I am aware of three colleagues seeking to contribute and we have now a maximum of only 11 minutes before we have to finish this session. Oliver Heald, followed by Sarah McCarthy-Fry, followed by Jim Knight.
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
The number of youngsters leaving school unable to read and write properly is 40,000 and we are told that in year 11 more than 60,000 are bunking off. What the Government seems to be proposing is that FE colleges should try to rescue these young people and teach them to read and write and add up and that there should be work placements as part of the package. What do you think about that model?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
Do you think this particular idea is a satisfactory, sustainable model for providing basic skills?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
Is rescuing them at 16 the answer?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
Yes. So, is it your view that the ones who are not learning to read and write before the age of 11 are the ones who are bunking off from school, leaving school unable to read and write, and that many of them are NEETs?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
Do you think it is the role of employers to facilitate the learning of reading, writing and adding-up?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
But they are basic skills which you need in order to work. That is the argument. So should employers not be taking a role in teaching them?
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
Our previous witnesses this morning, the college heads, spoke about the soft skills, the employability skills, that the FE colleges can help with. I know you said you have not had a chance to look at the apprenticeship announcements made yesterday, but I was particularly struck by the programme-led apprenticeships which will focus on learning that develops generic employability skills. One of the SMEs in my constituency was worried that they were taking on apprentices who did not understand the rigours of employability, such as the requirement to turn up on time. The world of work is very different from the world of learning. Do you think SMEs are more likely to take on apprentices who have been through this type of programme-led pre-apprenticeship work, where the FE college takes on the training in those general employability skills?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
It is possible to look at the level of prior attainment and qualifications those currently not participating have achieved. About 20 per cent. of 16-year-olds and around a quarter of 17-year-olds have reached level 2 on leaving school and are therefore perfectly capable of going to do A-levels, for example. Would you agree that there is therefore not an issue for them around the quality of their pre-16 education? It is more a question of motivating them to carry on learning. How do you suggest we achieve the culture shift that is necessary to raise the expectation and aspiration of those young people?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
My question is more around how you shift the culture of aspiration and ambition for those young people. I think you agree that it is desirable both for those young people and the wider economy for them to carry on learning beyond level 2 to get to level 3. So my question is this: we are suggesting compulsion, but what are you suggesting to help raise the culture of aspiration, so that those young people who have the necessary prior attainment to carry on to do level 3 do so?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Okay. I could go on, but I will not do so.
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
I have two questions. The first is on apprenticeships.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
I simply say to the hon. Gentleman that he should allow time for the replies and we only have four minutes.
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
On apprenticeships, you will know that in the latest figures level 2 and level 3 numbers are down for apprenticeships. Why do you think that is? In particular, why do you think that level 3 apprenticeship numbers have declined steadily for so long?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
Might it relate to the question that was asked earlier by Mr. Lammy about employer engagement? You perhaps might shed some light on this issue. The employers involved in apprenticeships are sometimes training providers, whose only business or whose principal business is to train rather than to do anything else. Do you have any feel for the number of other types of employers—one might say genuine employers—that are involved in apprenticeships?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
May I have another stab, Mr. Bercow?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Very briefly.
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
Would one of the ways of assisting that mission be to make the system rather less opaque? If the funding was more straightforward and the system less bureaucratic, would that attract more employers to deal with apprenticeships?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
We have less than 60 seconds for the last question and answer.
David Lammy (Labour, Tottenham)
When you say that your employers are very happy with the apprenticeships that are being offered, presumably, they are happy with level 2 and level 3 apprenticeships.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Colleagues, thank you very much indeed. There is no time for any further questions. I think that we have explored the issues very thoroughly and I would like to thank Mike Harris and Alexander Ehmann very much for sharing their time and expertise with us this morning.
We now move on, as efficiently as we possibly can, to our final witness of this morning’s evidence session, who represents the Connexions service. Come in, Mr. Gordon; the water is warm. Welcome, my name is John Bercow and I am chairing this Public Bill Committee. You are the last witness this morning and we look forward to what you have to say. Will you introduce yourself formally and then we will go straight into questions?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
Hello, Kieran, it is nice to see you again. As you will remember, when the National Audit Office reviewed the work of Connexions Partnerships in 2004, it said that there was
“a lack of clarity regarding the respective role of schools and the Connexions Service in providing careers advice to young people.”
Will the Bill provide additional clarity in respect of the role of schools and Connexions? Can the Bill be amended to make more improvements in that regard?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
As you know, the Government are intent on establishing an adult careers service and, I believe, are thinking of 10 pilots. Is there clarity of purpose about those pilots and if so, what is it?
John Hayes (Conservative, South Holland and The Deepings)
You have discussed with me and others in the past the fact that Connexions clearly focuses on some of the most challenging young people and, by the way, does an excellent job in that respect. Is there not a case for having a parallel careers service—an all-age careers service—sitting alongside Connexions? As you know, it is done elsewhere with some success elsewhere, and might be an appropriate way of bringing to light some of the provisions in the Bill for the young people that you describe and for older people in similar hopeless circumstances.
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Welcome, Mr. Gordon. We shall debate the transitional arrangements for local authorities taking over Connexions, as well as some of the issues concerning data and the information management systems that are used. It would be helpful to the Committee if you could describe how Connexions currently keeps track of which young people are participating in education and training and supports those who are not, with particular reference to the Connexions client information system.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
That was very comprehensive answer, for which we are extremely grateful, but it was quite long and if you could give pithy replies, we can get more people in. I am extremely grateful for the information that you have provided.
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Particularly for NEETs and the more detailed and difficult work that personal advisers carry out, I presume that there is data sharing with other agencies. Is that done with the consent of the young person?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
And all the arrangements that you have just described would transfer to local authorities under these proposals?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Clearly, you and your advisors are working with the target group that we are after in respect of raising the participation age in this proposed legislation, so you have a good understanding of their needs. What are the priorities for ensuring that the right provision is in place to enable all young people to have access to appropriate options by the time that the leaving age is raised in 2013?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Can I ask about the database that Connexions uses? When I asked the Local Government Association last week about the duty that will be put on it to promote participation, it said that it would rely heavily on the existing Connexions database, yet the Association of Colleges said in its evidence that it is seriously worried about whether that database is fit for purpose. Do you accept that? If you do, what enhancements are needed before 2013?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Okay, there seems to be a conflict of opinion.
Would I be right in assuming that the main focus of Connexions’ work at the moment is with 16-year-olds and people who are about to leave current compulsory education? Yet in future, particularly as diplomas are rolled out, young people will have to make a critical decision, probably at 13 and 14. Is that a group that the service is used to working with or will there need to be developments in that area to ensure that people make the right decision early on in their lives?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
What role do you think that the service currently plays or will play in future in raising aspirations? I do not mean just the aspiration to stay on, although the Government and we in the Opposition wish people to stay on in education and training. I am talking about the aspiration for people, particularly those from disadvantaged groups, such as black and ethnic minority boys or white working-class boys, to make career decisions that will help them go into employment, and or the aspiration for young women to go into employment patterns that offer higher future earning potential. Quite often, we hear evidence that young people are guided down a safe route by their teachers, rather than an aspirational route.
Phil Wilson (Labour, Sedgefield)
Are you confident that the capacity exists within local authorities to take on effectively the new responsibilities that they will be facing?
Phil Wilson (Labour, Sedgefield)
So, how would you remedy that? Is it simply a matter of funding the new arrangements so that capacity can be increased, or do other reforms need to take place?
Phil Wilson (Labour, Sedgefield)
What do you think Connexions will be doing differently in the run-up to the raising of the leaving age? How will you change the way that you work?
Phil Wilson (Labour, Sedgefield)
Finally, do you think that there should be an element of compulsion in the Bill?
Angela Watkinson (Conservative, Upminster)
The Bill requires education and training to be suitable for the person. Do you think that the Bill is clear enough on how that suitability should be assessed and defined, and who should be responsible for that function, or would you wish to see the Bill amended to clarify those things?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
Mr. Gordon, I want to ask you about the transfer process. An independent report by Professors Watts and McGowan suggested that current provision arrangements were highly variable across local education authorities, and that the transfer process was unlikely to make any changes to that. In fact, Professor Watts said:
“The next couple of years are likely to see a growing diversity in local arrangements made for careers services for young people.”
Do you agree with that analysis and, if so, are you concerned about it?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
You mentioned money. The money for the transfer process is not ring-fenced. Are there aspects of the current provision in Connexions that you feel will be squeezed or potentially put at risk under the transfer process?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
You mentioned vulnerable young people. I want to ask you particularly about the provisions in clause 65, which relate to children with special educational needs and learning difficulties. The Bill places a duty on LEAs to assess the training and educational needs of young people with special educational needs, but the number of young people with statements is not entirely inclusive of the number of young people with SENs. Do you think that the Bill will do enough to address those issues?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
You will be aware, perhaps, that the Education and Skills Committee, in its 2006 report on special educational needs, was particularly concerned about the availability and quality of post-16 provision and said that there was a danger of children with special educational needs and learning disabilities being let down during that transitional phase. Do you think that the Bill will strengthen post-16 provision, or does more need to be done for young people with SEN?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
With your indulgence, Mr. Bercow, I have a quick final question specifically on further education and colleges, where, again, there has been some concern about delivery for young people in those categories.
You will be aware that the Government will introduce new regulations on colleges incumbent on the implementation of powers under the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 in the summer. Do you have a view on whether those regulations have begun to, or will, make a significant difference to the delivery in FE for young people with special educational needs?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
On the subject of those who cannot read, write or add up when they are 16—about 40,000 leave education each year—is it right to say to them, “Well, look, you have had 10 to 12 years in school, we have not managed to teach you to read, write or add up, so we will force you to stay in education or training.”? Is that not presumptuous?
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
This is my point. We know from talking to people from colleges and representatives of employers that it is possible to teach those young people to read, write and add up. Will we be satisfied with a system that says, “Oh yes, you spend 10 to 12 years in school and then we rescue you and teach you to read and write using these methods.”? Surely, that is a cock-eyed system.
Oliver Heald (Conservative, North East Hertfordshire)
Do you have any information from talking to 16-year-olds about when they feel that they cannot read and write and start to go off the rails? Is it seven or eight? What sort of age is it? It is pretty clear that they start truanting once they are in year 7.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Do other colleagues want to contribute? There is a deathly hush. If there are no further questions, we can conclude this sitting, which is the last of this morning’s evidence-taking sessions. I thank Kieran Gordon on behalf of myself and all the members of the Committee for his very clear and lucid evidence. We are grateful for it and we have benefited from it.
Further consideration adjourned.—[Mr. Michael Foster.]
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Welcome to this, the last public evidence-taking session on the Education and Skills Bill. My name is John Bercow and I am co-chairing the Committee. I appreciate that a third witness has been added at the last minute; you are very welcome too. I ask you to introduce yourselves briefly and formally, then we will go straight on to the process of question and answer.
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Thank you for coming today, it is very much appreciated. My first question is to the British Youth Council. Your briefing says that the British Youth Council strongly opposes raising the participation age to 18 and the potential criminalisation of young people who choose not to participate. Could you expand on those views please?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
You did a survey of young people. Can you tell us what the young people that you contacted said about this proposal?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Can you account for the fact that the Government’s consultation process seems to point to different figures? Their survey says that 66 per cent. were in favour of compulsion. Do you think this is because the Government conducted their own research on their own proposals? Are you sure your surveys are right?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Thank you. In your briefing about the youth market, you say that it needs to be considered whether the proposals could lead to more age discrimination and discourage employers from recruiting young people. Could you say a bit more about that? Do you think the Bill will damage the employability of 16 and 17-year-olds?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
That is my allocation. I would like to come back later if I may, Mr. Bercow.
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Thank you all for coming. The first question is informed by the British Youth Council’s evidence but I think it will be a question to all three of you. I agree with what is said in this evidence—that choice is really important for young people, as is voice for young people. Where I part company is in thinking that having the choice to do nothing is a good choice. Could you comment on whether you think young people should be allowed to choose to do nothing?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
I shall follow that up, but I would first like to hear Nigel’s view?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Thank you. James, you said there should be other options such as volunteering and support. If those were there—the Bill does not rule them out and indeed I have talked about the importance of both those things—does that mean that you would come closer to supporting a duty to participate?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
A final supplementary, before I finish with Nigel, is on the research. Clearly your research had a slightly different answer from the Government’s research. Do you agree that it has been quite difficult within the nature of the public debate to differentiate a raising of the school leaving age, which a lot of the media and some people believed we were proposing, and the reality of what we are proposing around a duty to participate? Under our proposal, leaving school at 16 and going to work, for example, as long as you do 280 hours of training, is one of the options that would be available to young people. Do you think that might have corrected some confusion and explained some of the difference perhaps?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
Finally, Nigel, do Fairbridge have youth justice referrals that they then work with?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
We heard from Barnardo’s and the Prince’s Trust that in their experience of people who are compelled to do some form of training, it works out quite well for them. Is that your experience?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
For the sake of the Committee, would you explain those acronyms?
Jim Knight (Labour, South Dorset)
I have indulged your patience too much, Mr. Bercow. Thank you.
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Starting with James, may I ask you both a question focusing not on the principle of compulsion, but on the practicalities of it for the hard-to-reach group of young people? Can either of you think of hard-to-reach young people with severe problems for whom what is in the Bill would be either unreasonable or impractical?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Nigel, from your experience of dealing with this group, do you think that, with the right offer and encouragement, all of that group can reasonably be expected to come forward, or do you have reservations about that expectation?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
James referred earlier—this question is to both of you—to a fourth or a fifth option. The Government’s option, as I understand it—we can test this with Ministers later—is reasonably rigid. The expectation is education and training. From your knowledge of this diverse group of youngsters, some of whom obviously have severe needs, do you think that it would be desirable to have a wider range of options for them, even if those were pathways back into education and training, rather than education and training themselves?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
James, is that your view? If it is, is the issue having those services available?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Very briefly, what are the implications of having the stick there? Is it just undesirable philosophically, or is it positively damaging?
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
May I ask the British Youth Council about the survey? You said that it was an internet-led survey. Would you say that the people who responded to your survey responded on the basis of the training opportunities that are on offer today, or did your research open up the possibility of the myriad types of training that might be offered in the future? Were people answering, “No, we do not want to carry on with what is there today,” but were they also asked, “Would you want to carry on if such and such was on offer?”
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
Both Barnado’s and the Prince’s Trust said that they thought that young people would benefit from the provisions, but they had a problem with the compulsion element. Do you agree that all young people could benefit from this extra two years of training and education?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Have you finished, Sarah?
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
I think so. I shall let other people come in, and I may wish to come back later if possible.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
By all means, we will try to accommodate you.
Angela Watkinson (Conservative, Upminster)
May I ask Nigel Haynes—I apologise, I do not know anything about Fairbridge—specifically what activities you undertake? I think you said you deal with under-16s. Is there anything in your activities that constitutes education, training or volunteering that could lead to accreditation? If you have very difficult young people who may not be ready to move on to another institution or whose confidence would be set back if they had to do so, do you have the capacity to offer that to any post-16 young people? If not, how do you envisage they will cope with moving on?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Several colleagues are seeking to get in with questions. I have seen you all, I think, and I am going to go to Gordon Marsden first and then to Stephen Williams.
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
Perhaps I should declare an interest as a former member of the British Youth Council executive, although by now a pretty antique one.
I come first to you, James, with one or two questions about your submission. My colleague, Sarah McCarthy-Fry, has touched on this already. You put strong emphasis on the majority of young people not wanting to have any form of compulsion. You state:
“The government wants young people to take part in education voluntarily”.
Do you not agree that by using that sort of terminology in the survey, “education” is often seen as a cipher for “school”, which is part of the problem that we have had in attitudes towards the raising of the participation age?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
This is an open question. If it is not the case, please let me know, but as far as I am aware, you have not asked any specific questions about work-based training, or training outside traditional educational establishments.
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
To follow that up, in a previous session I asked several questions about the position of young people with disabilities under the Bill. Has any survey work been done among your membership or organisations that are particularly concerned with the attitudes of young people with disabilities?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
Okay. May I come on to an interesting proposal in your evidence? You suggested that there should be an amendment to the Bill to make personal, social and health education mandatory in the curriculum for key stages 3 and 4. That was interesting because personal, social and health education has been discussed by several Committees, including the Education and Skills Committee, which reported a couple of years ago on citizenship education. By PSHE, do you mean citizenship education?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Sorry, Helen. The acoustics in the room are not as good as they should be. Could you try to speak up a bit?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
So that I am absolutely clear—again, without getting sidetracked—there has been a great debate about the distinction between citizenship education and PSHE. Are you suggesting to the Committee that we should have separate amendments to make PSHE and citizenship mandatory, or are you assuming that the two are the same thing?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
I would like to ask a couple of questions of Mr. Haynes. I have worked quite closely with Fairbridge in Bristol over the past two and a half years, presenting certificates and being on the ship. Some of the people in Bristol cooked lunch for me, so I am a great admirer of what you do.
I have met many of the young people who have gone through the programme recently. Most are in their late teens or early 20s and have chosen to be there. It strikes me that, in order for them to stay there, there must be a great deal of investment and incentivisation by outdoor pursuits courses and others to make learning and training fun, so that they want to be there. That clearly cannot happen across the NEET group, because it would require a large amount of resources. Therefore, not everyone can offer what Fairbridge offers at present, if it were compulsory for NEETs to participate in training. Would you agree with that?
Stephen Williams (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Given that you also work with people up to the age of 25, might not a better alternative to compulsion up to 18 be an entitlement that people can access when they are ready for it, perhaps after 18?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you. We have less than 15 minutes, and four colleagues want to ask questions, so we need pithy questions and pithy answers.
Celia Barlow (Labour, Hove)
Nigel, you spoke about pathways in the Bill that will assist, but the problem is getting young people to want to reach those pathways. Is there anything in the Bill that would assist that, and, even more, is there anything that you would like to assist those difficult young people that you deal with?
Celia Barlow (Labour, Hove)
Would you like a tie-in with the new deal? How do you see young people progressing from your age group into the new deal?
Celia Barlow (Labour, Hove)
I have a brief question, probably to James. Obviously, there are twice as many male NEETs as female. Do you believe that there needs to be a different approach in terms of gender?
Madeleine Moon (Labour, Bridgend)
May I take you back to the impact and consequences of compulsion? One of the interesting things from this morning’s evidence from the principals of colleges and last week from the Association of Directors of Social Services, Barnardo’s and the Prince’s Trust, was that all felt that compulsion had a place but that it was almost the thing you kept in your back pocket and hoped never to need to use.
They felt that it is the nature of the relationship and the conversation that you have with the young person that is important; that dialogue and commitment, engagement rather than compulsion, would lead to success. Each felt capable of running projects that had that dialogue, had that adult relationship, but also had the adult consequences of failing to meet expectations and requirements. Can you see how that can work? Can you recognise their perspective on why compulsion is a useful thing to have in your back pocket?
Madeleine Moon (Labour, Bridgend)
It is interesting because this morning one of the principals said that the question was always, “How did we fail you?” rather than placing the responsibility on to the young person who opts out. That is in the present system. They felt it created a different relationship between the provider and the young person who was engaged with the course.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Very briefly, Madeleine.
Madeleine Moon (Labour, Bridgend)
Part of the problem with young people who are failing is that they are not very good at exercising choice and that, when given choice, they will always take the line of least resistance and least engagement.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
We have just over five minutes to go. Nick Gibb is next and then I shall try to include Sarah McCarthy-Fry with a supplementary, if she still wishes to ask one.
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Nigel, what your organisation does is fantastic, looking at the website. If a 16 or 17-year-old is on your course and participating in your programmes, will that constitute a fulfilment of the duty in clause 2?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
But if you do not lead to a qualification at the end of your course—
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
Assuming that 100 per cent. of young people is a long-term aim, although there are caveats, how far to that 100 per cent. do you think we would get without compulsion, and how long do you think it would take us to get there? I know it is, “How long is a piece of string?” but—
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Helen Deakin, James Cathcart, Nigel Haynes, thank you very much for your valuable contribution this afternoon to our proceedings. In the case of the British Youth Council, thank you also for your written submission. We will now have a comfort break of just over 10 minutes, unless there is a public revolt against that proposition, and at 5 o’clock we will reconvene for the next set of witnesses, when the stars of the Department for Children, Schools and Families will be on parade for members of the Committee and any other interested observers to see and hear.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Welcome, colleagues and interested observers, to the last part of the evidence-taking procedure on the Education and Skills Bill. We have two hours—injury time could extend that to two and a quarter hours but absolutely no longer—for the ministerial witnesses and their officials. The first to appear is the Minister of State for Schools and Learners, Jim Knight, who is of course a member of our Committee and with whom we are very familiar; welcome, Jim, to your new seat. I wonder if your supporting officials would briefly and formally identify themselves before we go into questioning.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you very much indeed. We will go straight into questions. In this evidence session, we have until six o’clock. Then we will allow an equal allocation of time for David Lammy and his supporting official.
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Minister, may I ask you about the research that your Department commissioned from the National Foundation for Educational Research? Page 2 of the NFER report says:
“The main aim of this external review was to collect and analyse national and international data relating to...the expected benefits of making education or training compulsory to the age of 18”.
The report concluded:
“There was little or no direct evidence of the likely impact of introducing a system of compulsory education or training to the age of 18”.
Given that research, why did you proceed with the proposals in the Bill?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
The analogous situations in this country were about raising the school-leaving age, not the training leaving age. Page 3 of the report says:
“The evidence suggests vocational qualifications do not yield the same economic benefits as academic qualifications...and that the benefits of some vocational qualifications at Level 2 or below are negligible”.
The report goes on to say:
“It is worth noting that these studies do not show that participation alone made young people more likely to be employed...especially as”
the evidence that they looked at related to
“voluntary rather than compulsory participation.”
The compulsory element is the key difference between us. We absolutely share the aspiration of higher participation rates and of getting more young people into work, training and vocational education, and to reducing the number of NEETs, which has increased quite a bit in recent years. We are absolutely with you on that. We are just not convinced, and the evidence is not convincing, that compulsion is the right approach. Your answer, Mr. Coles, does not move away from that either.
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Moving on to subject of criminalisation, I understand your arguments about compulsion, although I do not agree with them. Even those witnesses who were in favour of compulsion were worried about the criminalisation element and the penalties. The TUC said that
“we are not in favour of anything which criminalises young people.”——[Official Report, Education and Skills Public Bill Committee, 22 January 2008; c. 55, Q139.]
Barnardo’s said that young people should not be left with a criminal record, and the Association of School and College Leaders and the Prince’s Trust both said similar things. Why does the Bill use criminal sanctions, as opposed to civil sanctions, as the ultimate penalty?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Yes, and directors of children’s services will probably get their way at all times when dealing with local schools. But what proportion of the people we are talking about will comply? Do you think you will reach 100 per cent.?
Nick Gibb (Conservative, Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
But beyond reasonable excuses, how many people do you believe will not participate just because of sheer wilfulness—or the lack of it?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you, both of you, for that illuminating and important exchange. I am about to go to David Laws. I am keen to protect the rights of Back-Bench Committee members, whose allocation of time must be of adequate sufficiency.
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Quite right, Mr. Bercow: we should have very brief answers. May I start with the impact assessment, Minister, which I think has your squiggle at the bottom of it?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
May I clarify something on page 23? All the costings are based on the Government being successful, through voluntarism, in getting up to 90 per cent., from 77 per cent. now. Is that right?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
So the cost figure of £774 million would be a bit more than doubled if the Government are not successful in getting to that starting point by 2013-15.
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Given the time, I shall turn to page 23, and the details about the costs of enforcement. You give an £8 million cost of issuing attendance notices. There is 2 million for fixed penalty notices and £2 million for prosecution after failing to pay the fixed penalty notice. Could you, or one of the officials, tell us on what assumptions about volumes of youngsters facing sanctions those figures are based? If you have it, what level of compliance with each of those sanctions, is assumed?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
I thought if you talked long enough, they would arrive.
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Blimey, that is very exact.
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Thanks. I would like to switch to another area. When local government colleagues gave us evidence, we asked them what would constitute a reasonable excuse for not participating in education and training. They set quite a high hurdle—they were talking about people who were almost sectionable. Is that your view, too, Minister, or do you have in mind a much larger group of people who would have a reasonable excuse?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
That is very helpful. That seems a crucial issue in assessing the worth of the Bill. Your definition is far more generous than the definition we were given by some local authority colleagues. Before we debate this in detail, is there any chance that you can publish, or give us a bit more thinking behind that more expansive description of exemptions?
David Laws (Liberal Democrat, Yeovil)
Thanks. That will still be useful.
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Good. We have that as a commitment and are very grateful for it.
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
We heard from many people who gave evidence that they were nervous about compulsion, but recognised that it was the only way to achieve what we were aiming to achieve. There were many caveats about putting the support mechanisms in place before we went down the sanction route. There was a suggestion from Barnardo’s that if those support mechanisms were not in place, the duty to participate should not apply. Would that fit into “reasonable excuse”?
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
These are new duties on local authorities. What monitoring do you intend to put in place to ensure that there is equality of provision? Will we take into account the fact that some local authorities will have a much larger proportion of NEETs and difficult and hard-to-reach people than others? How will we manage that?
Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Labour, Portsmouth North)
Why 2013 to 2015? Is it convenient, because people are going up to secondary school in September and it seems right? Was a shorter or longer lead-in period considered?
Angela Watkinson (Conservative, Upminster)
May I ask the Minister to reflect a bit more on the practical side of enforcing the compulsory element of the Bill’s provisions? Assuming that the extra 10 per cent. whom we are trying to reach will have a range of problems that might not be encountered in the average student, if a student came from a low-income or workless household and incurred an attendance order that they then breached, and then got a referral order and finally incurred a fine that they had no means of paying, would you plan to annex repayments of defaulted fines against their future earnings? If that is one of the proposals, will it be a greater incentive to that category of student?
Angela Watkinson (Conservative, Upminster)
If they know that a percentage of their future earnings will be taken for the repayment of fines, what effect do you think it will have?
John Bercow (Conservative, Buckingham)
Thank you. I currently have on my list seven colleagues wishing to contribute, only two of whom have spoken before. They will, of course, be somewhat lower down the list. I call Gordon Marsden.
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
Minister, pursuing the voluntary sector issues a little more, I am very clear from what you have said—it is very clear from clause 5—that the Government see the voluntary sector as an important deliverer of the alternatives to school-based learning. However, I am more concerned about the mechanisms whereby local education authorities will seek pretty demanding targets as they might not necessarily exercise the full range of options. Will you say a little more about how that might work in terms of guidance?
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
Mr. Coles, given your 14-to-19 responsibilities—you and I have had conversations about them in other circumstances—I am particularly interested by the extent, for pre-16s, to which we have the capacity under the Bill to engage the very groups of young people who might be put off by traditional participation. I wonder what thinking is going on in the Department and in your group on how we engage young people who, as early as 11, 12 or 13, show clear signs of being switched off conventional academic education.
Gordon Marsden (Labour, Blackpool South)
That is laudable, but will it not inevitably involve some flexibility in, and derogation from, the requirements of the national curriculum?