---

Dr. Ian Gibson (Norwich, North) (Lab): This is a real A-plus report, which will have hugely positive implications and ramifications across the British education system. However, does it address the problem of the gender imbalance and the problems of different results between the two sexes and the different motivations?

Mr. Clarke: May I say how delighted I am to see my hon. Friend, who is also my personal friend—most of the time—in the House?

I can give my hon. Friend the assurance he seeks. Although we have a strong record on increasing the number of apprenticeships, which have trebled since 1997, it remains the case that in some sectors—for example, construction and engineering—there is a very low number of young women taking on apprenticeships. Our approach, across the range, is to ensure that there is a real attack on the issues of gender imbalance, which exist throughout the education system. The proposals allow ways in which we can address that more effectively.

Mr. Damian Green (Ashford) (Con): I am glad that the Secretary of State signs up to the universal consensus that one of the historic failures of our education system—probably going back to the second world war—has been the inability to make vocational education attractive enough early enough, so that those who could most benefit from it do so. That is why the drop-out rate is so high, as he emphasised.

In that context, may I urge him to be radical in his White Paper and not simply restrict himself to the idea of changing the qualifications? We should learn from other countries, especially in other parts of Europe that have a much better record on vocational education, and allow pupils access to vocational education much earlier. It is often too late in our system to wait until they are 14-plus because by then they have been turned off full-time education. If the Secretary of State has that as part of his White Paper, I suspect that it will stand a much greater chance of long-term success.

Mr. Clarke: We do indeed have that. Under the existing pre-apprenticeship schemes, young people aged 14 to 16 take time out from school with an employer and
 
18 Oct 2004 : Column 656
 
a local college, and there are some interesting pathfinder schemes, which I can show the hon. Gentleman if he is interested, that demonstrate precisely the truth of his remarks. From the age of 13 or 14, many young people want to start getting at least an understanding of the workplace and how things go, which is very positive indeed. Mike Tomlinson's report reflects that approach and drives it forward, and I am sure that the White Paper we shall publish in January or February will continue to do so.

Mr. David Drew (Stroud) (Lab/Co-op): The Tomlinson report is welcome, even if long overdue. Will my right hon. Friend use the report as the opportunity to make a clarion call and take up with the professions and the wider establishment the long-held belief—certainly held by me and, I am sure, many others—that there is an anti-industrial culture in this country? It is time to accept vocationalism in its own right, as it is vital to the future of our country. Will my right hon. Friend take that up as a matter of urgency?

Mr. Clarke: It is interesting that my hon. Friend used the phrase "anti-industrial". There has never really been an issue about some vocations; a vocation in medicine or law is seen as okay academically, but industrial vocations are seen to be more complicated. In general, other countries—Germany is the example often given—have paid much more attention to that matter. That culture is deep and difficult to move. I think we shall succeed in moving it, but my hon. Friend is right: achieving it will require a tremendous amount of effort and consensus across the country. The reason that we are standing at a turning point is that there is now the will to make that happen, and I look forward to working with colleagues to ensure that we can really drive out the anti-industrial emphasis in our education system.

Mr. Nick Gibb (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton) (Con): Tomlinson expresses concern about literacy and basic skills in maths, but should not those matters be sorted out by the end of primary school? By the age of 14, it is too late in many cases. Surely, the real problem is not the exam system in secondary school but the teaching methods in primary school, where, despite the national literacy strategy, too much emphasis is put on whole language teaching of reading at the expense of phonics. Far too few primary schools teach multiplication tables by rote. Does the Secretary of State accept that Tomlinson is over-complex, will undermine the gold standard of the A-level and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Collins) said, will be a huge distraction from the real issues and causes of concern in our education system? Doing nothing is not an option, but doing the wrong thing would be catastrophic.

Mr. Clarke: I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's analysis in just about any respect. I do not share his analysis of the pedagogical measures that are being used. I draw attention to the fact that, thanks to the work of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary—who is sitting next to me on the Treasury Bench—when he was Secretary of State for Education and Employment, the literacy and numeracy strategies have made a material difference and have increased performance at
 
18 Oct 2004 : Column 657
 
the age of 11. It is necessary to address those questions by improving teacher quality as other Members have outlined, but the proposals are not about abolishing A-levels or anything of that type. People can try to run a scare on that basis—they are entitled to do so—but the report simply does not bear that interpretation, as Mike Tomlinson himself has made clear today and previously.

Mr. David Heath (Somerton and Frome) (LD): May I ask the Secretary of State about the breadth of the academic curriculum? In the traditional sciences, far too often there seems to be a lack of imagination and relevance. There are invidious choices in the humanities, especially between history and geography, and there is a lack of opportunity in languages, both modern and classical. Will the proposals create more latitude to allow able students to explore to the fullest extent the whole range of the curriculum?

Mr. Clarke: Yes, they will. As I said in response to the question asked by the hon. Gentleman's Front-Bench colleague—the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis)—collaboration is particularly important so that different schools and colleges work together to make real curriculum offers to young people as they reach the age of 16, 17 and 18. That is already happening much more now, including with some of the more surprising and narrow subjects. I am confident that what the hon. Gentleman is looking for will indeed be met in the proposals in our White Paper.

Miss Julie Kirkbride (Bromsgrove) (Con): I agree with what the Secretary of State said today about his aims and aspirations, but like the right hon. Member for Newport, East (Alan Howarth) I worry about the one-size-fits-all approach. The Secretary of State is right to say that vocational education has been lacking in the UK, but at the other end of the spectrum he must also worry about the many fewer Nobel prizes, for example,
 
18 Oct 2004 : Column 658
 
in science that the UK now wins compared with some years ago. Will he reassure the House that a rigorous academic standard of externally assessed education will be available for the benefit of those young people who are capable of it, for the benefit of the UK economy and for the betterment of mankind?

Mr. Clarke: I can give that specific assurance, as I have tried to do all afternoon in terms and quite unequivocally. The report is about raising academic standards, raising educational standards, raising achievement and raising aspiration. I believe that we can do that and, for the reasons that the hon. Lady mentions, we need to make great progress, but she is quite wrong to categorise any diploma idea as a one-size-fits-all approach. In fact, some existing qualifications are much more in that one-size-fits-all model. I do not refer particularly to A-levels or GCSEs; some of the complicated qualifications for hairdressing, bricklaying or whatever have absolutely no application for anything else at all. We need to build skills, talents and creative thinking in a way that allows people to take on things more widely. That is precisely what the framework that the diploma offers will achieve.

BILL PRESENTED

Gambling

Secretary Tessa Jowell, supported by The Prime Minister, Mr. Secretary Prescott, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Secretary Blunkett, Mr. Secretary Darling, Mr. Secretary Reid, Mr. Secretary Murphy, Ms Secretary Hewitt, Mr. Peter Hain, Margaret Hodge and Mr. Richard Caborn, presented a Bill to make provision about gambling: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed. Explanatory notes to be printed [Bill 163].

---