Clause
55
Directions
Jim
Knight:
I beg to move amendment No. 190, in
clause 55, page 29, line 38, leave
out from beginning to ‘the’ in line 40 and
insert—
‘(a)
specifying’.
The
Chairman:
With this it will be
convenient to discuss the following: Government amendments
Nos. 191 to
194.
Amendment No. 95,
in
clause 55, page 30, line 5, at
end insert—
‘(e) specify the
minimum qualifications and experience required of providers of
services.’.
Government
amendments Nos. 195 to
197
Jim
Knight:
Given that we had a slight problem with the last
pair of Government amendments, of which one was not put to the
Committee, I want to be absolutely clear that I would like all eight
Government amendments in the group to be put to the Committee and
agreed to, so that we do not have to return to them on
Report.
An effective
Connexions service is critical to raising participation—a point
that hon. Members have made on several occasions in this Committee and
that has just been made at some length by the hon. Member for South
Holland and The Deepings. We are committed to devolving responsibility
for the delivery of the Connexions service to local education
authorities. The Bill will achieve that, but it is important that the
Government retain the means to ensure that the essential core functions
of Connexions are delivered consistently across authority
boundaries.
The
Connexions service is currently delivered directly by the Department,
and consistency can therefore be managed directly. It is critical to
the work that the Connexions service does to reduce the number of young
people not in education, employment and training, which will become
ever more important under our proposals for raising the participation
age, that there is national co-ordination and consistency, for the sake
of service users. Clause 55 as drafted therefore proposed a broad power
to give directions to a local education authority on the exercise of
its Connexions functions set out in clause 54—the delivery of
Connexions services. Subsections of clause 55 set out what the
directions may cover.
On further consideration, I
have decided that it would be better if that direction-making power
were more tightly defined, and I imagine that members of the Committee
will agree that that is desirable. That deals with a concern expressed
to me on behalf of local government. The agreement between local and
central Government following the local government White Paper allows
local government a wide range of freedom and flexibility in how it
delivers agreed outcomes. A broad power to direct might be taken to
signal that central Government were not committed to that agreement,
however clear and tightly focused our intention.
I shall outline the effect of
each amendment as briefly as I can. Amendments Nos. 190 and 191 will
narrow the power to direct by limiting its operation to the areas set
out in the subsections that follow. Amendment No. 192 will remove from
the scope of the directions two areas of operation: setting out how
Connexions services are to be made available and specifying standards
that are to be met. As I have just explained, I accept that those could
be considered incompatible with the new local performance framework and
the agreed national indicator set. Amendment No. 193 will replace the
areas for direction
removed by amendment No. 192 and therefore sets out what directions may
cover. The first paragraph of amendment No. 192 allows directions that
specify the descriptions of individuals who may be involved in
delivering Connexions. We propose to use that to specify minimum
qualifications for Connexions personal advisers. Now is a good
point to discuss amendment No. 95, which was tabled by the hon. Member
for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton and is grouped with the Government
amendments. I hope that it is a probing amendment, designed to clarify
our expectations of the qualifications held by Connexions personal
advisers. Quite apart from the provisions in clause 55, the quality
standards for information, advice and guidance, which we discussed
earlier, deal with the qualifications and experience of staff. We will
ensure that local authorities must have regard to those standards.
Section 10 of the standards is the relevant section. As I made clear,
we will use the direction-making power provided by the first paragraph
of the amendment to specify the minimum level of qualifications that we
expect Connexions personal advisers to hold, in keeping with what is in
the standard. On that basis, I hope that the amendment is not
pressed.
11 am
The second paragraph of
amendment No. 193 allows directions that require the authority to
ensure that the authority or any Connexions provider delivering
services on its behalf co-operates with the national Connexions Direct
service. Connexions Direct is an award-winning national helpline and
website service for young people. It complements face-to-face services
provided by local Connexions services and is highly regarded by young
people. The website regularly has over 100,000 visits per week. The
service has received extremely positive feedback from young people. The
website holds information on local Connexions provision—for
example address and phone numbers, local website links and details of
major activities or campaigns—which adds to the site’s
value. It also supports local Connexions services. It will only work,
however, if local authorities keep it up to date. The paragraph also
allows directions requiring co-operation with Jobcentre Plus and any
other agencies that help young people find suitable employment,
education or training. I can envisage the national apprenticeship
service being included here.
The third paragraph of
amendment No. 193 allows directions to deal with the use of the
Connexions brand. That is the direction-making power to which I
referred when speaking to amendment No. 94. Since Connexions was
established, the brand has acquired well established recognition among
young people. We want the brand to continue to be prominent after local
authorities take responsibility for the services under clause 54. That
way, young people know the core services that are on offer and what
they can
expect.
Amendment No.
194 allows us to direct authorities to adhere to the national
specifications for the Connexions client information system. That is
very important if we are to have easy and rapid updating of information
on individual young people. It is also important for ensuring that we
have data security to high national
standards.
Mr.
Hayes:
The Minister is giving a comprehensive account of
these important amendments. To what extent does he anticipate local
authorities will need to interact in this regard? We have not discussed
that much. He mentioned the need to have systems that are
interoperable. I am not sure we have sufficiently considered how much
interaction there will be, not merely between agencies but between
areas, for supporting young people.
Jim
Knight:
There is considerable interaction between
different areas of Connexions. Services in those different areas will
be delivered by local authorities and will be the responsibility of
local authorities. The sorts of interaction generally relate to young
people who live in one place and access education and training or work
in another. There are also young people who travel from one place to
another and who might turn up in a different place and access
Connexions. A decision has to be made on whether they are temporarily
in a place and it is best to continue with the previous personal
adviser, or whether it is best to transfer the advice into the local
area. Similarly if a Connexions service run by a local authority in one
area where a young person lives started the advice, it is likely that
they would carry on that advice even if a young person accessed
education and training in a different authority. A decision might,
however, be made between authorities, in consultation with the young
person and the educational institution they are attending, on whether
or not it is appropriate to move the service from one local authority
to another. I hope that that satisfactorily answers the hon.
Gentleman’s
question.
Beneath that
sort of real interaction, which is designed to offer a joined-up,
seamless service for young people, data transfers are required within
the Connexions client information system. The hon. Gentleman used the
word interoperable, which may not be entirely the right word, but if
the services are all to be delivered to the same standard, the various
data systems do need to be interoperable. The relationship with
Connexions Direct and the Connexions client information system is a
different one. The national Connexions service does not hold data on
individuals; the data that are passed up are anonymised and are used
for statistical purposes.
The hon. Gentleman can make his
long and passionate speech about our difficulties with NEETs, but while
we are on the subject, it is worth saying that the rise in the number
of NEETs is due partly to the rise in the number of 16 to 18-year-olds,
but we certainly do not shy away from the problems. However,
participation rates have increased in recent years: the proportion of
16 to 18-year-olds in education or training was 77.3 per cent. at the
end of 2006, an increase from 76.8 per cent. the previous year. We are
seeing some good trends, but that does not mean that we do not take the
problem very seriously. The whole reason for trying to pass the Bill is
that we want to be able to tackle this
problem.
Mr.
Hayes:
I do not want to go down the NEETs road,
Mr. Bayley, not because it is not vital, but because I
suspect you would not let me. Back on this issue of interoperability,
which is critical to this group of amendments, we heard disturbing
evidence from the
Association of Colleges that, in its opinion, the Connexions database,
which lies at the heart of the Bill’s work, was “not fit
for purpose”. I speak without knowledge of that beyond what we
were offered, and certainly with no dogma, but that analysis was
disturbing. That view was later countered by other witnesses, but given
what the Minister was just saying about that database being the heart
of the information that is going to be shared across agencies and
areas, on what basis does he think that claim was made and is there any
substance in
it?
Jim
Knight:
Obviously I heard what the Association of Colleges
had to say in response to the question and what was said by the witness
from Connexions who disagreed with that assessment. I have looked at
other assessments of the CCIS by the Prime Minister’s delivery
unit, among others. There is a good degree of confidence in the system.
That does not mean to say that in the period between now and when we
raise the participation age, there is not further refinement to be done
to the system, but we remain extremely confident that is a robust
system, which has been working reasonably well for Connexions in its
present operations.
Amendment No. 194 will also
allow us to issue directions on another important subject. Young
people, especially in our cities, often go to a school, college or
training provider outside their home area. If for any reason they drop
out of learning, it is most important that that information gets
swiftly to the Connexions provider for that school or college, and that
the provider passes on the information without delay so that it reaches
the authority in the person’s home area. If the young person has
dropped out of learning, it is the home authority that has the duty to
follow them up and to take every possible step to get them back into
education, training or employment.
Amendment No. 195, makes it
clear that matters in subsections (3) and (4) are those about which
directions can be given. Finally, amendments Nos. 196 and 197 are
important clarificatory amendments. Amendment No. 196 deals with the
effective delivery of a range of important services to improve
opportunities for young people. It makes it clear that directions can
require a local education authority to ensure that whoever carries out
Connexions functions under clause 54, whether it is the local authority
or a Connexions provider, also provides other services specified in the
direction. Those services need not relate to education, but may relate
to social security. For example, it is intended that, if necessary, the
power could be used to ensure that local education authorities and
others providing Connexions services are also responsible for
conducting work-focused interviews with young persons, using powers in
social security legislation. That ensures that a range of activity
aimed at helping young persons into education, training or employment
can be brought together in one place. Amendment No. 197 makes it clear
that different directions, as provided for in this clause, can be
given, depending on the Connexions service in question.
Having set out the case for
amendments Nos. 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196 and 197, I ask the
Opposition not to press amendment No. 95.
Mr.
Hayes:
The Minister said that he felt we would be pleased
with the amendments, because they clarify and specify various aspects
of how, why and where advice and guidance will be given to young people
in respect of the new provisions in the Bill. He is right: I do welcome
those clarifications. The Bill was insufficiently clear as drafted. For
some of the reasons that I advanced during the debate on the previous
set of amendments, we think that that is unacceptable and seek greater
clarity of the kind the Minister is hoping to provide through the
Government amendments. That is why we tabled amendment No. 95, which
would specify the minimum qualifications and experience required of
providers of services, although I note that the Government’s
panoply of amendments also deals with the nature of providers and their
qualifications.
The
important aspect of this debate, which we will no doubt repeat when we
discuss amendment No. 96, is that we need to be absolutely clear about
how, where and by what method advice is to be given. I intervened on
the Minister in respect of interaction between agencies, and I think
that he recognises that that is an important point. I am not sure,
however, that interaction is assisted by the enormous number of
organisations that are now to have a hand in giving advice or managing
the system. For example, there is to be a new apprenticeships advisory
body—the national apprenticeships service—as a result of
the apprenticeships review. It is not terribly clear how that will
co-ordinate its work with all the others that have a role in these
matters.
I could go
on about some of the other risks of lack of clarity and consistency in
the way young people are guided and supported, but the Minister is
right to say that the Government amendments are helpful. They do
provide some of the answers to questions we have posed, and they are
certainly a step in the right direction. It would therefore be churlish
of us not to give them a welcome, if only a lukewarm welcome, or to
divide the Committee on any of them. Neither, on that basis, would we
want to press amendment No.
95.
Amendment
agreed to.
Amendments
made: No. 191, in
clause 55, page 29, line 41, at
end insert
‘in the exercise of the
authority’s functions under section
54(1);’.
No.
192, in
clause 55, page 30, line 1, leave
out paragraphs (b) and
(c).
No. 193, in
clause 55, page 30, line 3, at
end insert—
‘( ) specifying
the descriptions of individual who may be involved, in ways specified
in the direction, in the provision of such
services;
( ) requiring the
authority to secure that any person by whom such services are provided
(whether the authority or any other person) co-operates
with—
(i) any person
providing services under section
59;
(ii) any person exercising
functions, or providing services, which relate to social security or
are connected with finding suitable employment, education or training
for young persons or relevant young
adults;
( ) as to the names and
symbols to be used, in ways specified in the direction, in connection
with services provided in pursuance of section
54(1);’.
No. 194, in
clause 55, page 30, line 4, leave
out from beginning to ‘in’ in line 5 and
insert—
‘( ) imposing
requirements as to—
(i)
the keeping of records, or
(ii)
the provision of information to local education authorities and persons
providing services in pursuance of section
54(1),’.
No.
195, in
clause 55, page 30, line 6, leave
out from ‘(3)’ to ‘a local’ and
insert
‘The Secretary of
State may
direct’.
No.
196, in
clause 55, page 30, line 8, after
first ‘services’ insert
‘(whether the local education authority or any other
person)’.—[Jim
Knight.]
11.15
am
Mr.
Hayes:
I beg to move amendment No. 96, in
clause 55, page 30, leave out lines 14 and
15 and insert—
‘(a) may be
functions or services relating to social
security,
(b) may specify
co-ordination of careers information and guidance with learn Direct and
Job Centre Plus, and
(c) may
specify the provision of functions and services matching young people
with employers offering
apprenticeships.’.
After
that uncontentious run through a series of procedurally complex
amendments, we move to the altogether more straightforward matter of
amendment No. 96. As we have been discussing, the clause gives the
Secretary of State the power to give directions to a local authority
relating to the exercise of its duty to provide support for effective
participation. There are concerns that the clause will not ensure that
basic standards will be met. I have made the argument this morning that
we need to be explicit in our demands on those who are missioned to
provide support to young people. Amendment No. 95, which I did not
press, was designed to ensure that professional standards were
adequate, and the Government amendments add some of the greater clarity
that I have argued for.
The amendment may be fairly
technical, but it reflects concerns that through our discussions and in
the Bill we should support high-quality careers advice and a highly
professional careers service. In their memorandum on the Bill, all the
professional bodies involved in careers advice said that the clause
needs to be strengthened. It currently provides a power to the
Secretary of State, but they argue that it should be a duty. The
professional bodies urge
that
“at the appropriate
time in the passage of the Bill, an amendment to this effect be
tabled.”
They feel that
it is
“unacceptable to
leave this to ‘chance’; the Secretary of State should
ensure that, in every locality, quality is assured to national
specification and
standards.”
There
is a great danger that the system of careers advice that is developing
is fragmented because it consists of too many agencies with overlapping
responsibilities. The amendment is designed to address that risk. I
alluded to that point a few moments ago when I mentioned the doubts
about whether the apprenticeship review would add yet more complexity
to the system, obscuring it still further. There is the new adult
careers service that the Government are piloting,
consisting of Learn Direct and Next Step; skills
brokers, who offer advice in respect of Train to Gain; the new
apprenticeship service that I have mentioned; Connexions, for young
people, which I described earlier as a jack of all trades; and
additional advice that will be offered, as it is now, through schools
and colleges, often completely independently of
Connexions. It will be
hard enough to draw the new young people whom we will be dealing with
into the system, as many of them face all kinds of challenges. I
suspect that the best way of advising and guiding them will be through
a system that is transparent, accessible and straightforward. It is not
certain that the panoply of organisations in the domain will provide
that degree of clarity. Our doubts relate primarily to quality, which
must be assured. That concern has been a theme of our debate thus far
this morning. Secondly, they relate to consistency: what is done must
work across organisations and areas. Thirdly, they relate to clarity
and transparency, and thus the need for a dedicated
service.
There is a
strong case that the adult service should be joined up, with advice
given to young people through an all-age careers service. If we really
want to imbue a culture of learning as Lord Leitch advocates, we need a
respected and universally recognised source of advice that everyone can
access. That sort of recognition requires a universal service. I do not
want to become tiresome in my advocacy of that approach, but we have an
important opportunity to explore the quality and nature of the advice
that we offer young people. On that basis, I wait to hear whether the
Minister can offer us further assurances on those three areas of doubt
that I have
identified.
Jim
Knight:
We have agreed to all but one of the Government
amendments to clause 55, which make more specific the direction-giving
power that we feel is needed. The amendment largely applies to
subsection (4), which is about joining up services rather than
establishing new services. The amendment concerns Connexions providers
co-ordinating careers information and guidance with Learn Direct and
Jobcentre Plus. It also enables directions to specify Connexions to
carry out functions in services matching young people with employers
offering apprenticeships. As the clause is drafted, even in the amended
form, we have all the powers necessary to do that, as well as the
intention to do that.
It is important that Connexions
providers liaise with all the local services that are helping young
people to get the skills, training and jobs that they need. As we have
discussed, the directions allowed by the clause will provide the power
to direct those providing Connexions services to co-operate with those
exercising functions or providing services relating to social security,
such as Jobcentre Plus. They could also be used to require co-operation
with other agencies that help young people to find employment,
education or training. Connexions services have a good track record of
working with Jobcentre Plus and other agencies, and we do not want to
disturb that. However, if we feel that we have to direct authorities on
the issue, we will do so.
We will consult on the detailed content of the directions on the passage
of the Bill. On the
subject of matching young people with employers offering
apprenticeships, the Committee may know that the apprenticeship review
announced plans for a new national apprenticeships service. I do not
want to say too much about that now as I imagine that my hon. Friend
the Under-Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills
may want to touch on it when we discuss clause 67. However, I will say
that we expect the national apprenticeships service to work closely
with Connexions, perhaps even being based, in some cases, in
Connexions’ high street outlets. The national apprenticeships
service will also help careers guidance staff in schools and colleges
to offer well informed and balanced advice about the apprenticeship
programme to all their students. The field force could be invited by
schools and colleges to participate in careers guidance evenings, to
give students direct
information.
The hon.
Member for South Holland and The Deepings has concerns about quality
assurance. We have already discussed that, and I have mentioned many
times that the quality standard will have statutory force. Clearly
there is some overlap with other agents, but we want the wide remit for
Connexions personal advisers to continue, and to be developed and
deepened and the quality raised, so that the advisers can hold the ring
for young people and are able to broker access to the range of other
agencies that might be able to provide specific and discrete advice. I
hope that that satisfies the Committee and that the hon. Gentleman will
agree that the amendment is not necessary and will therefore withdraw
it.
Mr.
Hayes:
We have had a good run on this matter this morning
and I think that the Minister has got the message that we are
absolutely determined that the advice and guidance given to young
people should be appropriate, and that we have greater doubts than he
has about the capacity of the existing system to deliver that
appropriate service.
The Government’s
thinking on that might be iterative, in that the piloting of an adult
service could lead to a different perspective on how careers advice is
given to adults and young people alike. Indeed, I predict that, over
time, we will rethink the relationship between Connexions and careers
advice and guidance. The purpose of the amendment was to explore those
issues, and it has done its job. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the
amendment.
Amendment
,
by leave,
withdrawn
.
Amendment
made: No. 197, in clause 55, page 30,
line 16, at end
insert—
‘( ) Different
directions may be given under this section in relation to different
descriptions of service.’.—[Jim
Knight.]
Clause
55, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
56
Local
education authorities: supplementary
powers
Question
proposed
, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Stephen
Williams:
I want to make a few remarks, essentially to get
an assurance from the Minister on the record. The clause says that
local education authorities in
England
“may provide,
secure the provision of or participate in the provision of
services”.
Does that open
the door for local authorities not just to provide services themselves
but to procure those services from the voluntary
sector?
During our
evidence-taking sessions we heard from two organisations that are
particularly successful in working with young people who have perhaps
become disengaged from education—the Prince’s Trust and
Fairbridge. Both organisations have extremely good track records of
working with people who are not in education, employment or
training.
11.30
am
During the
recess, I attended City of Bristol college at a time when a group of
young people who had been through a Prince’s Trust course were
completing their assignments and giving their end-of-course
presentations. The transformation of those young people from the start
of the course to the giving of their presentations to the audience was
quite incredible, particularly given their growth in self-confidence
while under the care of the Prince’s Trust. I have seen similar
journeys by people who have taken Fairbridge access to learning
courses.
I would like
an assurance from the Minister that the clause opens the way for local
education authorities to engage with the third sector—after all,
we do have a Minister with responsibility for the third sector. Such
organisations should have a recognised role in providing information,
advice and guidance, or access to learning and training courses, which
will perhaps lead to formal qualifications. I would like an assurance
that the clause opens that
possibility.
Jim
Knight:
The clause principally relates to the
responsibility of local authorities to deliver Connexions services in
line with current practice. It will allow local authorities the maximum
possible flexibility. The clause proposes that local authorities should
have the power to deliver Connexions services on behalf of another
local authority where such arrangements are already made. The clause
can be used by local education authorities to procure services from
others, including the voluntary
sector.
Subsection
(1)(a) and (b) refer to clause 54, which states in subsection
(3):
“For the
purposes of this section and section 55, a local education authority
makes services available if it ... makes arrangements with another
local education authority or another person for their
provision.”
That
provision allows local education authorities to use some of the niche
capability to which the hon. Gentleman rightly referred, and which can
be extremely effectively delivered by voluntary sector organisations. I
hope that he agrees, along with the rest of the Committee, that the
clause should stand part of the
Bill.
Question put
and agreed
to.
Clause
56
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
| 
