|
Column Number: 125
Standing Committee H
Thursday 12 February 2004
(Afternoon)
[Mr. Jimmy Hood in the Chair]
Clause 21
Meaning of ''plan'' etc.
2.30 pm
Mrs. Eleanor Laing (Epping Forest) (Con): I beg to move amendment No. 255, in
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 256, in
clause 21, page 8, leave out line 29.
Mrs. Laing: May I say in the traditional way, as it is my first opportunity to do so, what a pleasure it is to serve on a Committee under your excellent chairmanship, Mr. Hood? I will say from the outset for the avoidance of doubt that, if one reads clause 21 as amended by amendments Nos. 255 and 256 it does not quite hang together. Therefore let me explain that these are probing amendments.
My concern is that in clause 31, to which clause 21 refers, the wording clearly—and rightly—states that it is the clause's intention to promote,
''equality of opportunity in connection with access to higher education''.
Everyone on the Committee and concerned with the Bill would agree that that is an important and honourable intention. However, it seems to my hon. Friends and I that clauses 21 and 22 take us away from that. Clearly, there is to be a difference between the way that matters are administered in England and in Wales. [Interruption.] I hear Labour members from sedentary positions muttering ''devolution''. I am well aware of the effects of devolution.
The Chairman: Order. I would say to hon. Members that I do not want to hear any whispering when a Member is moving an amendment. I hope that the Member speaking will be given the best attention.
Mrs. Laing: Thank you, Mr. Hood. We are all aware of the effects of devolution and it would not be in order for me to discuss them here. But I am concerned, as are my hon. Friends, about the fact that these matters are to be treated differently in Wales from in England. Indeed, already a consequence of devolution is that students in Scotland and students from England, Wales and other places who attend universities in Scotland are treated differently from students who attend universities in England and Wales.
I suppose I should declare a retrospective interest as a graduate of Edinburgh university, which I still support. [Interruption.] Actually, it runs a rather good alumni scheme and manages to squeeze money out of us; it does so very well. Of course I am totally in favour
Column Number: 126
of free enterprise in the raising of funds for universities in so far as alumni schemes go, if not in other ways, and that is why I support mine. But that is not the point; the point is that it is clearly unfair that matters are dealt with differently in Scotland and England. That is an accepted fact, but I appreciate that it is not one for debate here. Before you call me to order, Mr. Hood, I shall not go further down that line. I accept unreservedly that it is a consequence of devolution that matters should be different in Scotland from in England. But it need not be a wrongful consequence if we are to consider that this important issue in clause 21 and, later, clause 22, can separate people in Wales from those in England. It cannot do what clause 31, to which clause 21 inherently refers, says that it intends to do in promoting equality of access.
Therefore, we suggest that the Minister should reconsider the matter. I am sure that there must be a technical explanation—which of course I accept—for why some matters are dealt with in relation to Wales and some in relation to England, and that they should be different from one another.
Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell) (Con): Is my hon. Friend aware that my reading of the relevant parts of the Bill pertaining to the issue she addresses is that in reality the Welsh Assembly would have the power to set a higher level than the Secretary of State in London, so on that basis, the issue she is addressing of the differential structure for plans for England and Wales—
The Chairman: Order. We are not discussing the levels of fees at present; we are discussing the plans. I ask the hon. Gentleman to stay in order.
Mrs. Laing: Thank you, Mr. Hood. I am aware of the point that my hon. Friend makes so well. I shall be careful not to stray on to the issue of fees, but the plan itself paves the way for the difference to which my hon. Friend refers. Therefore, when we come to discuss fees, we shall not be discussing that issue on the right foundation if we have not thoroughly explored this issue first.
Chris Grayling: I note your guidance, Mr. Hood. In the case of the establishment of plans I refer to the flow of students across borders, which I am sure my hon. Friend would recognise. For example, 74 per cent. of the university of Aberystwyth's students are from England. I am certain that that would cause great complications were we to have differential plans between England and Wales for the targeting of those who are sought for the goal of levelling and equalling access to university.
Mrs. Laing: My hon. Friend is correct. As a general principle, if we are talking about equality, and especially equality of opportunity, throughout our country, to create artificial boundaries between England and Wales, England and Scotland and across the water into Ireland also, is not the right way forward. That is why my hon. Friends and I have tabled the amendments.
It does not make sense to treat those two groups of potential students so differently. It is possible, while still honouring the spirit of devolution and recognising
Column Number: 127
the power of the Welsh Assembly, to ensure that there is no anomaly, if we construct the Bill correctly. That way we would not have to deal in future with the complaints that will undoubtedly come to the Minister if it turns out that the equality of opportunity he seeks is destroyed by the provisions in his own Bill.
Mr. Tim Collins (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (Con): My hon. Friend the Member for Epping Forest (Mrs. Laing) made her case clearly and powerfully. I am asking the Minister to say whether he believes that there could or should be a difference between England and Wales in the application of the principle of equality of opportunity in access to higher education, in theory or in practice. I hope that it is common ground between all Members of this Committee that equality of opportunity of access is a universal principle that should be interpreted in the same way in all circumstances across the United Kingdom. If that is the case, though, it is difficult, as my hon. Friend says, to see why there should be a difference between plans for institutions of higher education in England and those in Wales.
If, on the other hand, the Minister expects these provisions, which my hon. Friend's amendments would remove, to have bite and to have any effect, presumably he thinks that there should be different interpretations of ''equality of opportunity'' in different parts of the United Kingdom. If the Minister will clarify this issue, it will be widely welcomed because—to pick up a comment from earlier proceedings regarding who outside these Committee Rooms might be interested in establishing uniformity on these matters between England and Wales—I have not heard any organisation or any individual outside our Committee arguing that ''equality of opportunity'' should be interpreted differently on different sides of the border between the Principality and England.
Mr. Graham Allen (Nottingham, North) (Lab): Does the hon. Gentleman think people in Wales are capable of making a decision in their own interests in this matter?
Mr. Collins: Of course, they are perfectly capable of making those decisions. What I am trying to say to the hon. Gentleman is that if the principles are universal, they should be interpreted and applied universally. I hope that he takes the view that equality of opportunity ought to apply in all parts of the United Kingdom, not just on these matters but across the board. I am not suggesting that either the English or Welsh interpretation would be superior, but agreeing with my hon. Friend's point—that the interpretation ought to be the same. That is the issue on which I am seeking clarification from the Minister: why does he think there may be circumstances in which the interpretation would be different?
Mr. Allen: So, the hon. Gentleman would be quite happy if these powers were vested in the Welsh Assembly, and they could tell all the English what they should be doing in these circumstances? Surely he must have some faith that they can interpret the
Column Number: 128
universal principles he is talking about for their own benefit and in their interest?
Mr. Collins: The hon. Gentleman is quite right, the logic of my position is indeed that it would be equally as acceptable for the Welsh Assembly to apply these principles universally in England as it is for the Secretary of State to apply them in Wales. However, the hon. Gentleman's position is that there has to be a distinction on either side of the border in England and Wales as a matter of principle, and so logically he thinks there could be a significant difference of interpretation of the principle of equality of opportunity.
Dr. Hywel Francis (Aberavon) (Lab): Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the discussions recently in the Welsh Assembly concerning this matter, and that the Welsh Assembly Government have invited a distinguished academic, Professor Theresa Rees, to lead an inquiry into the consequences of tuition fees in Wales? If that is the case, should he not await the results of that inquiry?
Mr. Collins: The only honest answer is: no, I was not aware of that. However, it does not materially change my argument. There are many other measures in this Bill involving the transfer of responsibility to the Welsh Assembly on a whole range of matters, including those to which the hon. Gentleman referred. In anticipating the possibility—it is a little too early to say ''likelihood''—that this legislation may reach the statute book, it is right that the Welsh Assembly should be making provisional arrangements to conduct analysis and research into the impact of, for example, the variability of top-up fees in Wales, should the new measures come into force. That is an entirely responsible step to take.
My point is rather different and narrower, and relates only to the amendment and the provisions to which it relates, rather than to the entire Bill. Although we have had two welcome interventions from the Government Benches, I am yet to hear the argument that equality of opportunity for access should be interpreted differently in different parts of the United Kingdom.
|
