| Higher Education Bill
|
|
Mr. Allen: I am sure that the hon. Lady is trying to support my remarks, and I thank her for her assistance. I am also sure that she joined the Labour lobby in voting for Sure Start and many other schemes. Mrs. Laing: I supported Sure Start. Jonathan Shaw: The Committee heard the hon. Lady say that she supported Sure Start. I thank her on behalf of my constituents and the Sure Start scheme in Chatham, but why did she not vote for the money? Column Number: 195 The Chairman: Order. We have enough problems dealing with higher education without embarking on discussions about other issues. Mr. Allen: I give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Aberavon (Dr. Francis). Dr. Francis: On that very point, which is dealt with in a report on adult learning entitled ''The Learning Divide'', does my hon. Friend agree with me and with Professor Theresa Rees, a very distinguished academic who, as I have pointed out in an earlier debate, has been asked to examine the impact of these proposals on Wales, that, as was reported in The Times Higher Educational Supplement last week, the most contentious issue is variable fees? However, the whole question of debt aversion is linked very much more to maintenance. The distinguished academic and medical practitioner, Dr Julian Tudor Hart, describes the situation in health as the inverse care ratio—the poorest people always have greatest difficulty accessing health care. The same applies in education—the inverse learning ratio. For example, a group not touched, in which I have a particular interest, is that of carers—in his area 9.79 per cent. of the population are carers. How many of those will enter higher education?
11 amThe Chairman: Order. I must ask hon. Members to keep interventions short. Every hon. Member will have the opportunity to catch the eye of either Mr. Hood or myself in the course of this debate. That is the time to make speeches, not during interventions. Mr. Allen: My hon. Friend the Member for Aberavon speaks with great passion about the situation in his constituency, and refers to another constituency. I could not sit down without reminding the Committee of the statistics for the number of families in his constituency that will qualify for a full grant—a £3,000 grant. It will be 58 per cent of families—I have the statistics for other constituencies too. More than that—the figures are certainly repeated for the constituencies of my hon. Friends and sprinkled about for the constituencies of Opposition Members—91 per cent in his constituency will get some form of grant. Only 9 per cent will get nothing from the package put forward by the Government. That is another perspective on my amendments. It is important to understand what is on offer here, and what we can do for our constituents. Mr. Willis: Perhaps we could get a grant for some heating this afternoon. I hope that we do not run the equivalent of a class war during this debate. It is not about one group of students. The hon. Gentleman will agree that a significant number of students, particularly over the last two decades, are going to university not from wealthy families but from families on marginal incomes. They will not receive significant grant aid under the Bill. We must not roll back the clock and penalise the very people, who through their own endeavours, have fought to get their sons and daughters into university. Column Number: 196 Mr. Allen: I am afraid that I cannot respond to the offer to be gentlemanly about this. The fact that 20 per cent. of working-class kids have gone to university over the last 40 years is not a reason for me to be nice and polite about the situation. It is intolerable; it is unacceptable. Vice-chancellors should do something about it, the Government should do something about it and Opposition parties that do not join in doing something about it should be as ashamed of the record as I am. My party has been in government for much of that period, and some kids suffer. We can call them working class or define them however we want; let us use a nice polite term about socio-economic standards or lower-income families or, as we are now being told, the kids from non-traditional families who do not go to university. We know what we are all talking about here, and that there has been an incredible waste of talent of my constituents and of everybody else's constituents. This is why we are here and why Parliament takes this issue seriously. We are frittering away—the polite expression, which we do not normally use in Nottingham, North—a lot of talent. Our country can ill afford to do so. If a student is good enough, regardless of their socio-economic background, they should be able to go to university. It is important that students should get the assistance for which 65 per cent. of families in my constituency would qualify if their kids were good enough to go to university. Their youngsters would need the £3,000, and debates about how much variability we can get on the head of a pin pass them by. Hon. Members in the Committee, the Chamber and the Opposition parties are talking down their chances by frightening students about their debt liability, which is income contingent, and which they can pay off when they are earning sufficient money. I reject the offer of the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough not to talk about the class base of education because it exists and we have a duty to do something about it. Mr. Thomas: I want to take the hon. Gentleman back to his exchange with the hon. Member for Aberavon. The Committee should not be misled by the figures, which are not applicable to Wales. If the Bill is enacted, it will be for the National Assembly for Wales to decide what the grant will be, whether there will be tuition fees and what the level of variability will be. Therefore, the hon. Member for Nottingham, North is wrong to give figures for the number of people in Welsh constituencies who will be eligible for the grant because that will not be decided until 2006. Mr. Allen: I take the hon. Gentleman's point that it is a devolved matter; I supported his earlier remarks about devolution, as he knows. Unlike the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale, we do not believe that the centre should instruct people on what to do about some of these issues. The Bill will allow greater freedom for universities to take the decisions. However, were the Welsh Assembly to take a decision similar to that proposed by Her Majesty's Government in Westminster, 50 per cent. of the Column Number: 197 constituents of the hon. Member for Ceredigion (Mr. Thomas) would be from families who would qualify for a full £3,000 grant and almost 88 per cent. of them would qualify for a partial grant. Only 12 per cent. would not get any benefit. Of course, not everyone can have the full benefit; there is a taper and we need to deal with the problem of people who are just above the income thresholds. As my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge said, there is a difficulty if people come from areas where house prices are very high.Many of these issues were addressed with the involvement of hon. Members before the Bill came into Committee. The fact that we managed to make the changes suggested shows the constructive way in which measures have been developed. Whether they are called rebels or loyalists, parliamentarians have had quite an impact on Government thinking, as the Minister will be the first to concede. I hope that he will also concede that there are several other areas in which hon. Members of all parties, whether they are designated as mainstream, rebels or anything else, can make helpful interventions to move the Bill forward. Mr. Mudie: I am listening with great sympathy and interest to my hon. Friend. My question is not hostile; I just want to tease out for future reference what he defines as working class. Does my hon. Friend agree that we would regard an individual such as an engineer—not a civil engineer but a maintenance fitter in a Nottingham factory as I was in my early days—or a returnee nurse as working class? However, if such people are earning the normal income for that occupation, their children would not get a grant, and they would get no help whatever with fees. Does my hon. Friend see the problem of persuading such families to encourage their children to go to university? Mr. Allen: My hon. Friend always was a tease. I am happy to be teased out on this occasion. First, let me remind him of the statistics for his constituency: 55 per cent. of his constituents will get a full £3,000 grant if the package goes through. If it is wrecked, 55 per cent. of his constituents will not get a £3,000 grant to go to university, or even have that possibility. Mr. Mudie: Will my hon. Friend give way? Mr. Allen: Let me just answer the question that he put to me teasingly earlier. In addition, fewer than 11 per cent. of his constituents would get a partial grant. He makes a serious point about those who are on incomes just above the key thresholds. My rough definition of working class in this instance is those who qualify for a full grant, which is those whose family income is £15,900 or less. That is a small sum of money. It is below the national average, but it is a working definition. I hope that he accepts that I put it forward in all good faith. Can hon. Members imagine themselves having a joint family of £15,900 or less and what their socio-economic situation would be? Let us not use the phrase ''working class''. Youngsters who struggle out of that environment and claw their way up the educational Column Number: 198 ladder to get the appropriate qualifications deserve the full grant. I am sure that my hon. Friend would agree and will support the proposal when it comes back.Mr. Mudie: I take issue with the word ''wrecked''. I appreciate that my hon. Friend has taken the trouble to table some thoughtful amendments. The implication is that if we approve the lead amendment, against the Government's wishes, we will have somehow wrecked the Bill. I am sure that he will agree that a Committee is a place where we persuade Ministers to make changes to the Bill. If we manage to do that, I do not see how it would wreck the Bill. I must push my hon. Friend on his definition of working class, which is a family income of £15,000 of less. The average family income is £28,000. If two individuals in a family were working full time and receiving the minimum wage, they would bring home £20,000. We should be a bit broader and look not only at people earning less than £15,000. That is a problem, but there is a greater problem with people who have done what we would wish to see; they have worked hard, bettered themselves and want to better their children's future.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2004 | Prepared 24 February 2004 |
