House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 3 Mar 2003 (pt 22)

3 Mar 2003 : Column 852W—continued

Education Funding

Angela Watkinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average Education Funding Spending Share per (a) primary pupil and

3 Mar 2003 : Column 853W

(b) secondary pupil is in London; and which London borough will receive the lowest EFSS per pupil in 2003–04. [100221]

Mr. Miliband: In London, the average education formula spending share per primary pupil in 2003–04 is £2,733 and per secondary pupil is £3,470.

Havering has the lowest EFSS per pupil in London. The main reason for this is that Havering benefits less overall than other London authorities from the top-ups in the funding formula to reflect the additional costs of educating deprived pupils, and the additional costs of recruiting and retaining staff in high-cost areas.

That is because, in London, only Richmond upon Thames has a lower proportion of deprived pupils than Havering. But Richmond upon Thames benefits more from the factor in the formula for area costs. The area cost adjustment for outer London authorities is split into east and west: wages in west London are generally higher than in east London so the ACA for west London is higher. Richmond upon Thames receives the (higher) ACA for outer London authorities in the west, and Havering receives the (lower) ACA for those in the east. The net effect is that Havering has a lower EFSS per pupil than Richmond upon Thames, and other London authorities.

Higher Education

Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what evidence his Department assessed on the deterrent effect of debt on potential students from lower socio-economic groups when drawing up the proposals in the policy document, The Future of Higher Education; and if he will make a statement. [98131]

Mr. Charles Clarke: The Department considered a range of evidence including its own commissioned research into "Social Class and HE: Issues Affecting Decisions on Participation by Lower Social Class Groups" (published 2001), the HE extension of the Youth Cohort Study (still in progress) and preliminary results from its evaluation of the Excellence Challenge. The findings suggest that concern about debt is only one of the inhibitors on HE participation. Cultural, social and institutional influences and educational background are also important. The right kind of information is vital. Recent departmental research suggests also that the most common cause of non-completion of HE courses is poor choice of course rather than financial problems associated with participation.

In the light of this evidence we are introducing the measures set out in the White Paper, The Future of Higher Education, notably means tested higher education grants of up to £1,000 per year and raising the loan repayment threshold from £10,000 to £15,000 from April 2005, but also the abolition of upfront tuition fees which were perceived as inhibiting access. In addition we are committed to improving our promotion, marketing and outreach to convince those from low income backgrounds that HE really is for them. We must also continue with our school reforms, particularly now at secondary level, to increase the number of young people with the right qualifications to benefit from higher education.

3 Mar 2003 : Column 854W

Mr. George Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if he will list the average amount of Government support towards living costs per student for each university and higher education institution in each year since 1980. [94708]

Mr. Charles Clarke: The information requested is not available in the format requested. However, information on average maintenance grant per student is available nationally for England and Wales and is shown in the table.

Average maintenance grant in England and Wales⁽²⁴⁾£

Cash terms In real terms 2000–01⁽²⁵⁾

Academicyear Student support scheme students⁽²⁶⁾^,⁽²⁷⁾ Mandatory award scheme students⁽²⁷⁾^,⁽²⁸⁾ Student support scheme students⁽²⁶⁾^,⁽²⁷⁾ Mandatory award scheme students⁽²⁷⁾^,⁽²⁸⁾

2000–01⁽²⁹⁾ 150 1,130 150 1,130

1999–2000⁽²⁹⁾ 130 1,150 130 1,180

1998–99⁽²⁹⁾ 690 1,200 720 1,250

1997–98⁽²⁹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,210 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,300

1996–97⁽²⁹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,240 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,360

1995–96⁽²⁹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,390 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,580

1994–95⁽²⁹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,520 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,780

1993–94⁽²⁹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,670 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,980

1992–93⁽²⁹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,610 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,980

1991–92⁽²⁹⁾^,⁽³¹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,550 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,980

1990–91⁽²⁹⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,480 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,000

1989–90 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,390 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,050

1988–89 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,320 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,060

1987–88 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,240 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,050

1986–87 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,220 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,070

1985–86 ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,170 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,070

1984–85⁽³²⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,240 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,310

1983–84⁽³²⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,310 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,530

1982–83⁽³²⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,270 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,590

1981–82⁽³²⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,250 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,730

1980–81⁽³²⁾ ⁽³⁰⁾— 1,190 ⁽³⁰⁾— 2,910

	Cash terms	In real terms 2000–01⁽²⁵⁾
Academicyear	Student support scheme students⁽²⁶⁾^,⁽²⁷⁾	Mandatory award scheme students⁽²⁷⁾^,⁽²⁸⁾	Student support scheme students⁽²⁶⁾^,⁽²⁷⁾	Mandatory award scheme students⁽²⁷⁾^,⁽²⁸⁾
2000–01⁽²⁹⁾	150	1,130	150	1,130
1999–2000⁽²⁹⁾	130	1,150	130	1,180
1998–99⁽²⁹⁾	690	1,200	720	1,250
1997–98⁽²⁹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,210	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,300
1996–97⁽²⁹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,240	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,360
1995–96⁽²⁹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,390	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,580
1994–95⁽²⁹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,520	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,780
1993–94⁽²⁹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,670	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,980
1992–93⁽²⁹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,610	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,980
1991–92⁽²⁹⁾^,⁽³¹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,550	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,980
1990–91⁽²⁹⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,480	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,000
1989–90	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,390	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,050
1988–89	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,320	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,060
1987–88	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,240	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,050
1986–87	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,220	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,070
1985–86	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,170	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,070
1984–85⁽³²⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,240	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,310
1983–84⁽³²⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,310	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,530
1982–83⁽³²⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,270	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,590
1981–82⁽³²⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,250	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,730
1980–81⁽³²⁾	⁽³⁰⁾—	1,190	⁽³⁰⁾—	2,910

⁽²⁴⁾ Payable to students normally domiciled in LEAs in England and Wales.

⁽²⁵⁾ Expenditure shown in 2000–01 prices based on the RPI (excluding mortgage interest payments) of September each academic year.

⁽²⁶⁾ Students starting their course in 1998–99, 1999–2000 and 2000–01 under the student support scheme funding.

⁽²⁷⁾ Average maintenance figures have been rounded to the nearest £10.

⁽²⁸⁾ Students who entered higher education up to 1997–98 and those who entered in 1998–99 to whom the mandatory scheme funding arrangements still applied.

⁽²⁹⁾ Student loans were introduced when student support arrangements were changed in 1990–91 to supplement maintenance grants which were frozen at their level in that year. Data in this table exclude student loans and relate to maintenance grants only.

⁽³⁰⁾ Not applicable

⁽³¹⁾ Includes an estimated 8,600 students and £17.5 million maintenance expenditure in respect of the London Residual Body.

⁽³²⁾ Up until academic year 1984–85 all eligible mandatory scheme students were entitled to receive a minimum cash grant (£205 in 1984–85; £410 in 1981–82 to 1983–84; and £385 in 1980–81).

Source:

F503G Survey of local education authorities on student support funding.

Additionally, loan support has been available to eligible students normally domiciled in the United Kingdom since 1990–91 and information on the average amount of student loan is given in the table. However, because the rules for eligibility between maintenance grants and loans differ, and because the average maintenance data refer to students domiciled in England and Wales, whereas the average loans data refer to students domiciled in the United Kingdom, the two sets of data should not be added together.

3 Mar 2003 : Column 855W

Student support provision—average loan: United Kingdom—academic years 1990–91 to 2001–02⁽³³⁾£

Average loan (United Kingdom)⁽³⁴⁾^,⁽³⁵⁾^,⁽³⁶⁾

Cash terms In real terms 2001–02⁽³⁷⁾

Academic year⁽³⁸⁾ Student support scheme students Mandatory award scheme students Student support scheme students Mandatory award scheme students

2001–02⁽³³⁾ 3,120 1,500 ⁽³⁹⁾3,120 1,500

2000–01 3,100 1,450 3,170 1,480

1999–2000 3,150 1,470 3,290 1,540

1998–99 2,580 1,520 2,760 1,620

1997–98 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,530 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,680

1996–97 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,490 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,680

1995–96 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,250 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,450

1994–95 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,040 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 1,240

1993–94 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 740 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 900

1992–93 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 660 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 830

1991–92 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 530 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 690

1990–91 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 390 ⁽⁴⁰⁾— 540

	Average loan (United Kingdom)⁽³⁴⁾^,⁽³⁵⁾^,⁽³⁶⁾
	Cash terms	In real terms 2001–02⁽³⁷⁾
Academic year⁽³⁸⁾	Student support scheme students	Mandatory award scheme students	Student support scheme students	Mandatory award scheme students


2001–02⁽³³⁾	3,120	1,500	⁽³⁹⁾3,120	1,500
2000–01	3,100	1,450	3,170	1,480
1999–2000	3,150	1,470	3,290	1,540
1998–99	2,580	1,520	2,760	1,620
1997–98	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,530	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,680
1996–97	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,490	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,680
1995–96	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,250	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,450
1994–95	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,040	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	1,240
1993–94	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	740	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	900
1992–93	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	660	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	830
1991–92	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	530	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	690
1990–91	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	390	⁽⁴⁰⁾—	540

⁽³³⁾ 2001–02 data are provisional.

⁽³⁴⁾ Student loans are available to eligible students normally domiciled in the United Kingdom.

⁽³⁵⁾ Student loans are available to students on full-time undergraduate HE courses (and students on full-time and part-time postgraduate courses of initial teacher training). From 1999–2000, students aged between 50 to 54 at the start of their course (this includes students who started their course after September 1998) can apply for a student loan as long as they can demonstrate to their awarding authority that they plan to return to employment after finishing their course.

⁽³⁶⁾ Average figures have been rounded to the nearest £10.

⁽³⁷⁾ Expenditure shown in 2001–02 prices based on the RPI (excluding mortgage interest payments of September each academic year).

⁽³⁸⁾ The time series of this table is different to that shown for average maintenance because student loans were not introduced until 1990–91, and provisional data are available for 2001–02

⁽³⁹⁾ The drop in the average loan is explained by final year students of a three year course entering the figures for the first time; these students are eligible for a lower rate of loan.

⁽⁴⁰⁾ Not applicable

Source:

The Student Loans Company

Next Section

Index

Home Page