|Draft Jobseeker's Allowance (Amendment) Regulations 2001
Mr. Brady: I am grateful to the Minister, and I do not intend to press him further on the matter now that he has kindly said that he will write to me. However, further explanation would be useful on the question of whether the measure of qualification for post-16 but pre-higher education is contained in the regulations, given that the hon. Gentleman has made it clear that higher education is not appropriate in the context of the regulations. At first glance, it appears that the only definition of such education is that it is funded by the LSC, and not that it must lead to any type of qualification.
Mr. Wicks: I will be able to reassure the hon. Gentleman, but rather than give a quick answer now, it would be more helpful if I wrote to him. Briefly, the LSC will cover the existing functions of the FEFC work-based training for young people currently undertaken by the TECs. It also has responsibility for school sixth forms and adult community learning, but I will reflect on what the hon. Gentleman has asked and, if the Committee agrees, I will write to him later with a more detailed answer.
I repeat the reassurance that the regulations are not bringing about any fundamental change. We are merely making technical amendments to bring an old regime into line following the Learning and Skills Act 2000.
It remains for me to thank you, Mr. Amess, for your chairmanship, and to commiserate with the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale, West (Mr. Brady) on receiving the regulations only eight minutes ago. Clearly, he should have received them earlier. I will not comment on whether I am pleased or sad that he did not get them earlier, given the detailed scrutiny to which he has subjected us.
Question put and agreed to.
Amess, Mr. David (Chairman)
Murphy, Mr. Denis
Russell, Ms Christine
|©Parliamentary copyright 2001||Prepared 21 March 2001|