House of Commons
Thursday 18 March 2004
The House met at half-past Eleven o'clock
PRAYERS
[Mr. Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
EDUCATION AND SKILLS
The Secretary of State was asked—
Adult Learning Grant
1. Laura Moffatt (Crawley) (Lab): How his Department is encouraging take-up of the adult learning grant. [162115]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Skills (Mr. Ivan Lewis): The Learning and Skills Council is working with further education colleges and other partners to promote the adult learning grant through college prospectuses, local advertising and mailshots. We plan to double the size of the current pilot from September by making the adult learning grant available across the south-east and north-east regions. It is currently available in 10 local learning and skills council areas.
Laura Moffatt : I am delighted to hear that the south-east is to be included in the programme of rolling out the adult learning grant. May I say that is excellent and welcome news in Crawley in particular, because those of my constituents who are in low-skilled jobs are keen to update their skills through our further education college? I thank the Minister for that initiative, which will provide them a good incentive, and I hope that it can be introduced as soon as possible.
Mr. Lewis: It is indeed good news that my hon. Friend's constituents will benefit from the adult learning grant, which is about ensuring that people with few or no skills have access to education throughout their lives. It is making a reality of lifelong learning and providing a small amount of financial support to enable such learning. It is essential for the economic future of such areas as my hon. Friend's, but it is also right in terms of creating a more socially just and inclusive community. Getting more adults with low skills back into learning will directly benefit our aspirations for young people and will raise school standards.
Access to Higher Education
2. Sandra Gidley (Romsey) (LD): If he will make a statement on access to higher education for the over-55s. [162116]
The Minister for Lifelong Learning, Further and Higher Education (Alan Johnson): The Government are firmly committed to increasing the opportunity for people of all ages to gain access to higher education. In the past eight years, the number of postgraduate students aged over 55 has increased by more than 130 per cent.—from nearly 4,000 to more than 9,000—and the number of undergraduates aged over 55 has increased by 154 per cent., from 22,000 to more than 57,000.
We provide a range of financial support, including some elements that students aged 55 and over can access if they are eligible. For students with dependants, those grants include the adult dependants' grant, which is worth up to £2,280, the parents' learning allowance, which is worth up to £1,300, and the childcare grant, which is worth up to £8,840. As the grants are targeted at students with dependants, the main beneficiaries are older students.
We have no plans to change our policy on the eligibility for grants of students aged over 55. Therefore, subject to parliamentary approval of the Higher Education Bill, older students will be eligible for the new combined grant of £2,700 from 2006–07.
Sandra Gidley : I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply, but he will be aware that when the Government signed the European directive on equal treatment in October 2000, they committed themselves to implementing age discrimination legislation by 2006, which will cover higher education, further education and vocational training. He has admitted that students aged over 55 are currently unable to access student loans, and the Bill before Parliament seems to include no plan to change that. In the light of the ageing work force and the need for people to work longer to have a substantial pension fund, does he not agree that such age discrimination needs rapid review?
Alan Johnson: No, I do not accept that. We support the article 13 changes in respect of age discrimination, but we believe that the decision not to give loans to students aged 55 and over was objectively justified. Indeed, a recent request for judicial review was turned down at the appeal court stage, because the court agreed with us that insisting that students aged 55 and over be unable to access loans constitutes a sensible and proper use of taxpayers' money, given that we wipe out any debt at the age of 65. I should add that under previous Governments the age limit was 50, so we have increased it.
We are committed to making it easier for mature students to get to university, but we do not believe that we need to go further in respect of loans to do so. Of course, mature students aged 55 and over are eligible for grants, and there will be specific help for them, in that the current loan for part-time students will be replaced by a grant.
Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): Does my right hon. Friend share my concern that, whether we are talking about students aged over 55 or under 55, the real task is to encourage people from poorer backgrounds—those in social classes 4 and 5? According to some reports, as a result of the expansion that will include another 10 countries in the European Union—countries whose students will be able to access British universities on the same basis as our own students—middle-class, quite wealthy students from such countries will affect the opportunity to open up access that I know the Government intend to provide. Is he worried about such reports?
Alan Johnson: I do not agree with my hon. Friend on his last point, but I entirely agree with his first point about widening participation, for which we are increasing funding. As to the accession countries, our estimate and that of the Higher Education Funding Council is that there will be an 8 per cent. increase in students from those countries, but that is a tiny proportion of the overall student population. Given that those students cannot access maintenance loans or grants, we believe it unlikely that those estimates will be exceeded. There are huge benefits from getting students from other countries to study in this country, and there is no basis for any fear that those students will interfere with our clear objective to widen participation in higher education.
School Admissions
3. Mr. David Chaytor (Bury, North) (Lab): If he will make a statement on the implementation of the pan-London co-ordinated system of admissions to secondary schools. [162117]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Skills (Mr. Stephen Twigg): That local education authority-led initiative will simplify the process for many London parents who apply for schools across London and, when implemented, it will rid us of the position whereby some parents receive multiple offers of school places while others receive none at all. All 33 London boroughs and their eight neighbouring authorities have signed up to the basic principles of the pan-London scheme, and I welcome that as a good example of local authority collaboration to make the admissions process easier for parents and children.
Mr. Chaytor : I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, and I commend the Government for their efforts to encourage greater co-ordination between local authorities over admission arrangements, not only in London, but across the country. However, will my hon. Friend explain how the concept of parental choice is compatible with a system under which 1,000 schools remain their own admission authorities and effectively choose which children to admit?
Mr. Twigg: I certainly believe that the system in London will improve the position and that we will be able to learn from what happens and apply it to other authorities around the country. It is essential that the
system is fair and understandable to parents and pupils, and we must have effective collaboration between institutions. That is what we are seeking to achieve, and I believe that it will widen choice and ensure that more opportunities are available for children and parents to enter the schools of their choice.
Mr. Tim Yeo (South Suffolk) (Con): Is the Minister aware that the pupil passport, which the Conservative Government will introduce after the next general election, will give every parent greater control over which school their child attends than anything that the pan-London co-ordinated admissions system can achieve? By abolishing the surplus places rule, we will put an end to the system that allows the education authority to order parents to send their children to failing schools against the parents' wishes. The passport cannot be used as part-payment of fees at an independent school, so we will ensure that the all the extra money that the next Conservative Government spend on education will benefit schools that are accessible to every family.
Mr. Twigg: I am interested to hear the latest version of the pupil passport, as the detail seems to change week in, week out. That may be part of the reason why the hon. Gentleman is unable to attract as many Conservative Back Benchers here today as there are colleagues on his Front Bench. I believe that we have made significant progress in giving support to schools, and I do not believe that the pupil passport will add anything positive to that. We want the highest possible standards in all our schools in all our communities throughout the country.
Mr. Phil Willis (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD): We are very supportive of the pan-London policy, which is much more realistic than what would be likely to happen if the Conservatives got into power. In yesterday's Budget statement, the Chancellor announced a major extension of the academy programme. Each academy is an independent school within the state sector with its own admission arrangements. Will the Minister distance himself immediately from the suggestions of Lord Levy and Andrew Adonis that the academies should be exempt from normal local education authority admissions policies, particularly with regard to special educational needs students? Will the Minister also confirm that the idea of having for-profit commercial schools by allowing Sunny Varkey into the system would be ruinous for the pan-London admissions policy?
Mr. Twigg: There is absolutely no question of academies falling outside the admissions code of practice. They have to fulfil the requirements of the code, as part of their funding agreement with the Department. The academies are of critical importance to our policy of seeking to ensure that we have the highest quality of education in some of London's poorest neighbourhoods. They are part of the pan-London admissions process, and I believe that they are something for us to celebrate.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |