Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
'( ) a Connexions partnership'.
Government amendments Nos. 9 to 12.
No. 8, in clause 117, page 55, line 17, leave out "may" and insert 'shall'.
Government amendments Nos. 13 to 16.
New clause 4--Support for 11-25 year olds: Wales: provision of services--
'. The National Assembly may provide or secure the provision of services which the Assembly considers will encourage, enable or assist (directly or indirectly) effective participation by young persons in education or training.'.
Mr. Boswell: After those brisk exchanges, I accept, of course, that Ministers wish to act in good faith, and I am sure that their assurances on clause 89 and on the amendment which deals with the Connexions strategy are well intended.
In response to a blunt question in Committee, the Minister has already given me the specific assurance that all young people will have access to independent guidance. I thought it appropriate to try to embody that in the Bill, and, in effect, to help the Minister to honour his assurance. In respect of that and of the second part of that amendment, considerable concerns remain in what might be described as the guidance professions and the careers services. Those have been reflected in representations to us by the Guidance Council and the Careers Service National Association. The concerns were also mentioned
earlier by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Allan), but I did not intervene then, so as to save time and repetition.Those in the careers services are concerned that, as a result either of signals from Ministers or of constraints on resources, activity has been diverted to young people who may be, or are in danger of being, socially excluded, at the expense of other young people. Frankly, if the Minister is to solve this problem, he will have to work something out--perhaps, although I anticipate it only in general terms, in the comprehensive spending review--to enable him to deliver a proper service to all young people, and a specific service to those in danger of social exclusion. Of course, he cannot comment on that at the moment.
On the substance of the amendment, we need to ensure that the undertaking that the Minister has given--that all young people will have access to independent guidance--means what it says. Essentially, that means access to a guidance interview, and/or to continuing support from guidance services if that is appropriate.
I believe that all of us who have had children who have passed through that age appreciate that, whatever their intellectual or other abilities, at some stage they need an opportunity to talk to someone outside their school and family who can give them well informed--and above all, independent--advice. That is the great virtue of the guidance and careers profession, and long may it continue.
In certain cases, access to IT information or a database may be appropriate and all that is needed, but in most cases the individual should meet a real person and receive real advice about their circumstances. That is a talisman which we all, on both sides of the House, need to preserve, and it is of great concern to the guidance profession.
In the second part of amendment No. 78, I refer to
There is a genuine, although I hope only potential, criticism of a service that is still in its early days of establishment--that everything is focused on the needs of the socially excluded. For example, there is a very strong emphasis on personal mentoring. It would not be appropriate to reopen all those debates tonight, but although the relationship required for the potentially socially excluded young person may be of a mentoring nature, it would be unfortunate if what, for shorthand, I shall call mainstream young people did not have access to a different mode. For example, they could be taught by their teachers, in school or whatever, and then have access to independent guidance, not necessarily on the referral of a mentor but as a procedure that they could ask for or choose.
The danger with the way in which the Government have structured the service is that they require some 20,000 personal mentors. If those are recruited in large numbers from the guidance profession--which, as I recall, numbers some 7,000 staff at the moment--there will be no separate guidance profession left to deliver the independent guidance that we all wish to see. That would cause the independent guidance to fall, by default.
It would perhaps be better to move more slowly, and with greater sensitivity to the needs of individuals. There may be a role for the personal mentor, especially for the target groups that Ministers have mentioned, but that does not necessarily mean that the model must be universally applicable to all young people, or must be the same whatever the region or local circumstances. Ministers have talked about that, and I think that they will be flexible in considering the bids for the plans that have been put forward for the Connexions service; the local tendering has now concluded its first phase.
I am not unhopeful, but I say to the Minister in all seriousness that there are still some real concerns in the guidance profession that this matter has not been got quite right yet. We need to hold to the principle of readily accessible independent guidance for all young people, and we need to find the right model of guidance and support for all young people. It will not always be the same for each and every one of them.
Mr. Rowlands: I shall speak briefly to my amendment No. 8. Whereas in an earlier debate I said that I thought that the English had a superior solution to some of the problems, in Wales the arrangements for the development of youth services as proposed in clauses 117 and 118 are, if not superior to those proposed for England, at least more appropriate to Wales than the English provisions of Connexions would be. But if we are to make those youth services work, the money must be where the legislation is.
I note with considerable interest that clause 117 says that the National Assembly
Amendment No. 8 would require that if the National Assembly for Wales issues such a direction and insists on a local authority's compliance with it, the Assembly "shall" rather than "may" provide the money for the local authority to fulfil that service. Without such a provision, the situation will arise--as it has so often in the past under all Governments--in which increased duties are placed on local authorities without adequate finance.
If, under clause 117, the National Assembly issues a direction to a local authority to provide certain youth services, as clause 118 states that authorities must obey such directions, surely the National Assembly should be obliged to provide the grants, loans or other financial assistance required to deliver the service. There is a compelling logic to my amendment and I hope that the Minister will accept it, so that clause 117(4) reads, "A direction under subsection (1) . . . shall include provision for grants, loans and other kinds of financial assistance" to local authorities.
Mr. Nick St. Aubyn (Guildford): I support the amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell) on a matter that I mentioned on Second Reading. In parts of the country such as the one that I represent, there is real concern that the diversion of
resources for an admirable intent--to assist those who are disadvantaged and who perhaps need more help--is at the expense of other sectors of the community.In a recent letter to me, the Guidance Council said:
In a fast changing world, it is vital that more able children have access to good specialist advice. If such access is curtailed to fund support for the less advantaged members of society, we shall all reap the consequences in the poorer choices made by more able children. If they do not receive the training and direction that they need when they are young, not only their future but the future of our economy will be in jeopardy.
Mr. Ian Bruce: My hon. Friend the Member for Guildford (Mr. St. Aubyn) spoke so briefly that I nearly failed to catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
I support amendment No. 78. I want to probe the Minister on the age ranges that would be covered under clause 108, especially if the amendment were accepted. Many colleagues are aware that young people with learning difficulties or mental disabilities will be greatly helped by the guidance referred to in the Bill.
I note that the clause relates to young people aged up to 20. However, such an age specification would often be inappropriate for young people receiving those services. The amendment might help local authorities by ensuring that appropriate guidance was available and the clause was not so prescriptive. It would provide that young people aged over 20 whose mental age was not more than 20 could receive further guidance to ensure that they could continue their career or obtain the training that they needed.
Will the Minister address that point? I have come across cases in local technical colleges, for example, in which there is an age cut-off beyond which assistance cannot be offered to such young people, although they are probably more in need of that guidance than their able-bodied counterparts.
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |