| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Blunkett (Sheffield, Brightside): I endorse the Secretary of State's remarks, and offer our thanks and appreciation to Sir Ron Dearing for the work that he has done in producing the report. We welcome the broad thrust of the report and the Secretary of State's statement this afternoon, which echo the principles and the programme that we laid out in our document only a week ago. [Interruption.]
However, was Sir Ron not precluded from examining the key issues of structure and funding within which his proposals must be viewed? Will the Secretary of State confirm whether he was working within a framework of market competition that sets school against school and
sixth form against college? Instead of receiving advice about their best route, young people are encouraged to stay on a particular route based on the existing framework.
The destructive market approach--which sets institution against institution and college against college, and which sees the Further Eduction Funding Council, local education authorities and training and enterprise councils at odds with each other--is an unsatisfactory and an unacceptable way forward.
Is it not deeply complacent for the Secretary of State to parade the notion this afternoon that the staying-on rates at age 16 are satisfactory, when last year the number of students in full-time education fell? [Interruption.] Only 59 per cent. of 17-year-olds are in full-time education in the United Kingdom, compared with an average of more than 80 per cent. in other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. [Interruption.] At age 18, the figure falls to 38 per cent. The number of students receiving advanced qualifications in this country is half that in Germany and Japan.
Is it not time to set aside the deep complacency--which manifests itself in the heckling of Conservative Members--and come together to introduce a programme of change that will transform this country's future knowledge and skills base?
How can the Secretary of State commend her changes to the careers service when they have led to fragmentation and to privatisation? Some 30 per cent. of students taking A-levels drop out, and the drop-out rate in the vocational field is also extremely high. Sir Ron's proposals for traineeships point clearly to the total failure of the Government's youth training scheme, which for years we said was unsatisfactory.
This afternoon, the Secretary of State had the cheek to compare it with the modern apprenticeship scheme, which is obviously completely different, with differing aspirations and a different level of achievement. The low status and the narrow base of the YTS is rightly condemned in Sir Ron's report.
We commend the emphasis by Sir Ron Dearing's report and by the Secretary of State's statement on rigour and quality. However, does the Secretary of State agree with me that it is time to ensure--through a programme of information, education and advice--that employers and those in the education service are clear that the vocational route can offer the same rigour and the same quality as the academic route?
Does she agree that underpinning those routes by the core skills, and by extending and developing the A-level route, is a key way forward in terms of breaking down the artificial barriers, the demarcation lines, that have bedevilled this country, and have led to only 27 per cent. of our adults having a vocational qualification, compared with two thirds of the population in Germany, for example?
Does the Secretary of State agree with me that it is time to plan so that we can avoid the conflict between vocational and academic skills, and draw them together into a common route that will allow this nation to go forward using the real talents and skills of all our people? Would that not set aside the prejudice that has existed for far too long against those who dare to soil their hands by being engaged in industry and commerce? [Interruption.] It is no good Government Members heckling me, because if it was not true, we would not be in the position that we
are in today, and the Deputy Prime Minister would not have undertaken a skills audit and admitted that the nation is in the plight it is in.
Finally, does the Secretary of State agree with me that it is unfortunate that there is any delay in tackling the issue of how to overcome disaffection and alienation in the 14-to-16 age group? We commend the way in which she is dealing with the proposals on the national record of achievement, but it is time to have common cause between the parties in overcoming the alienation and the difficulty that so many young people have in relating to the current curriculum. Is it not time to give young people hope--hope of a job, hope of learning, hope of being trained, and hope of having a future where they can earn and deliver for their families what we took for granted in generations gone by?
Mrs. Shephard:
If the hon. Gentleman wanted a common cause, he has not gone the right way about it, in the extraordinary way that he has sought to present the successes of the education policy over the past 16 years or so. Nevertheless, I thank him for his guarded welcome in so far as he has given it. As far as funding is concerned, clearly he will be aware that we are now spending a record amount on education. He will also be aware that there is reference in the report to extra sums for developing GNVQs and the careers service.
I was interested to hear the hon. Gentleman confirm the Labour party's position: that it is against healthy competition--which we believe drives up standards between institutions. It is for that reason, of course, that we have introduced an independent and excellent education and guidance service. It will give independent advice to young people, so that they can choose the appropriate route for themselves.
In relation to staying-on rates, the hon. Gentleman ignored the fact that the Government have been congratulated by the OECD on the improvement in staying-on rates: 90 per cent. of 16-year-olds, 80 per cent. of 17-year-olds and 60 per cent. of 18-year-olds are in full-time education or training. However, we accept that more needs to be done--and that is why we are having the report. Indeed, approximately 83 per cent. of people in our work force have qualifications.
It is unfortunate that the hon. Gentleman seeks to denigrate youth training, when there are excellent outcomes for young people who complete the course. Where we need to take care--this is an issue that is addressed by the report--is on the question of those who drop out of youth training, just as those who drop out of A-levels and out of GNVQs will have their interests addressed by the detail of the report.
I am glad that the hon. Gentleman mentioned the importance of core skills--or key skills, as Sir Ron calls them. This concern has routinely been expressed by employers and by universities. The proposals in the report, which we shall accept, tackle those questions by introducing literacy, numeracy, IT and other skills at every level in the qualifications network. I wish that the hon. Gentleman had given the Government some credit for developing GNVQs and NVQs. GNVQs are very motivating and they are rigorous and demanding, but more needs to be done. That is why I have said specifically that we intend to accept the proposals from Dr. Capey, backed by £30 million to ensure that those reforms of GNVQs are in place.
The vocational route is, of course, extremely important, but what matters in both academic and vocational routes is the question of standards and rigour. That is what this report underlines.
Madam Speaker:
Order. May we now have brisk exchanges--questions and responses?
Sir Malcolm Thornton (Crosby):
May I say how much I welcome Sir Ron's report today? It echoes many of the recommendations and considerations that the former Education Select Committee gave to the issue, as my right hon. Friend said in her statement. When she writes to the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority and to the NCVQ to attempt to broker this marriage, will she stress again, as she has just done, the question of rigour and the absolute need for acceptance by all concerned--the teachers, employers, parents and pupils themselves--of the equivalence between the vocational route and the academic route? Without that acceptance, nothing that is proposed will work.
Mrs. Shephard:
I thank my hon. Friend for his welcome, which is especially valuable given the distinguished position that he holds as Chairman of the Select Committee on Education. I certainly intend to write to the chairmen to emphasise the importance of rigour. When my hon. Friend has had time to absorb the report, I am sure that he will be glad to discover that the equivalences between the different routes will be given clearly on the backs of the proposed certificates. That will help young people, their parents and teachers, and, above all, employers and admissions tutors.
Mr. Don Foster (Bath):
I too welcome Sir Ron Dearing's proposals and the Secretary of State's ready acceptance of many of them. I especially welcome proposals that will break down the barriers between academic and vocational courses and qualifications, because they reflect proposals made by Liberal Democrats as long ago as 1992.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |