Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140-151)
BILL RAMMELL
MP AND PROFESSOR
DAVID EASTWOOD
17 JANUARY 2008
Q140 Mr Boswell: You will also look
at BMEs in that.
Professor Eastwood: Yes, and we
have taken advice from the Equality Challenge Unit specifically
on the BME issue.
Bill Rammell: Also, additionally,
that is HEFCE's responsibility. We have quite rightly said that
these policies are in-line with our overall PSA targets which
have been equality proved, but in the spring we will be conducting
an equality impact assessment on the whole of the higher education
funding allocation.
Q141 Mr Marsden: Professor Eastwood,
the Minister indicated this morning some lines of thought for
you in terms of extending the exemptions. If these exemptions
are extended, have you got any thoughts as to how they are going
to be financed? How is this going to affect the overall £100
million figure? The Minister may wish to come in on this, but
it is a fact, is it not, that if these results, however laudably
insignificant, give extra exemptions it will have an impact on
that £100 million figure?
Professor Eastwood: Clearly if
there was a significant increase in the number of exemptions,
that would have a funding consequence and we would need to refer
that back to Government in terms of the £100 million savings
targets. I think what the Minister is saying is that this is a
policy which will be dynamic as it moves forward. On the basis
of the assessments that we will conduct in this Spending Review
period and beyond, the Government will have to come to appropriate
decisions. In that context it is worth noting, as we have been
saying throughout, that the major financial impact of this comes
at the end of the Spending Review period, so a number of these
issues, including issues about augmenting the number of exemptions,
will almost certainly be issues for the next Spending Review period.
Q142 Mr Marsden: Accepting what Professor
Eastwood has just said about the gearing effect, have any of your
civil servants done any modelling for you as to what the implications
of your suggestions would be on the £100 million figure?
Bill Rammell: Let me reiterate
what I said earlier, that I am not persuaded we should add to
the exempted list at the moment, but I think it is right that
we should look at that. In terms of the process that I will be
asking HEFCE annually to go through, the last analysis they undertake,
if they accept my proposals, is whether there is a case for exempting
entrants to the subject who have an ELQ from the general ELQ funding
rule. In such cases the Council should also advise on the
scope for removing exempted subjects from the list.
Q143 Mr Marsden: You see it as a
like-for-like process, do you?
Bill Rammell: Not in all circumstances.
Q144 Mr Marsden: That is the principle
in order to maintain your £100 million, is it?
Bill Rammell: It is, and I do
not say that can never be breached. If HEFCE comes back to us
we would have to look at that.
Q145 Mr Marsden: Forgive me for saying
this, because I think this is a crucial point, that is how you
would square the circle over the medium to long-term beyond that
three year period, is it?
Bill Rammell: Yes. I say that
because I do not accept that exempted subjects are set in tablets
of stone forever and a day.
Q146 Ian Stewart: In line with that,
if you are looking at it, will you then consider the OU-Birkbeck
proposal in relation to people who return after five years?
Bill Rammell: I have to say, I
am not persuaded and convinced of that argument and I think it
is one not factually borne out by the evidence. It is a fairly
risky proposition for universities to effectively be saying that
the value and currency of your degree qualification ceases after
five years. Certainly in terms of the graduate earnings premium
it does not stop after five years, if anything the graduate earnings
premium lengthens the longer you are in the workplace with that
degree or qualification.
Q147 Ian Stewart: Surely, Minister,
it is relevant in a flexible workforce situation where you are
asking people to re-skill?
Bill Rammell: In respect of those,
we are saying vocational foundation degrees, we are saying a whole
range of strategically important and vulnerable subjects, we are
saying employer co-financing, but you cannot spend the same amount
of money twice. This comes back to a fundamental choice, do we
put the interests of the eight million people in this country
who already have degree qualifications ahead of those who are
not at first base, and I do not think we should.
Q148 Mr Cawsey: There was something
said this morning which I was quite taken with, which is a simple
practicality about all of this, that is the universities will
not be able to monitor it. If somebody comes forward to apply
and they have got a previous qualification, maybe from several
years ago, and they simply do not declare that then you cannot
make the system work, can you, because you would be classing them
as people coming to the system for the first time?
Bill Rammell: I think we can and
David might comment on this.
Q149 Mr Cawsey: How?
Bill Rammell: We will shortly
be asking HEFCE to advise us and then issue guidance on the way
this is dealt with. I think by and large, and I do not accept
this in all cases, most people will and do obey the rules, but
clearly there will need to be a random checking process. In some
cases universities may need to check with the previous employers
and previous education establishments to corroborate that particular
students do not have a first degree. We will have to do that in
a way that we get the balance right between protection and not
an overly bureaucratic system. That is something we are going
to ask David to advise on and then get that advice as quickly
as possible.
Professor Eastwood: There are
three quick points. First of all, we will offer good practice
guidelines to institutions in March. Secondly, we work with institutions
to audit numbers and final funding is determined on the basis
of audited returns. Thirdly, as the Minister has hinted, there
will need to probably be some additional dipstick-type checking
mechanism in order to have a robust audit process.
Q150 Mr Boswell: Just briefly, because
in a sense I was on the same point as Ian, I suppose my ELQ dates
from 1966 so it might have got forgotten about, but MPs have public
biographies so it tends not to be! Can we at least have some understanding
from HEFCE about the duty of care which is put on the institution?
This is not trivial because in this House yesterday we were discussing
the obligations on employers in relation to the issue of National
Insurance numbers and whatever and in particular that there would
be no fine or onerous duty which will add to the problems which
other of our witnesses have identified about these proposals.
Professor Eastwood: As the Committee
knows, for a number of years now HEFCE has been working, and working
effectively, to reduce the burden of regulation on institutions,
and the way in which we have sought to implement this policy and
the way in which we will continue to implement this policy will
be consonant with that.
Q151 Dr Gibson: Several of us are
quite interested in how the numbers are collected and particularly
not just the number crunching but analysis of them and database
setting and so on. Have you got a statistical unit within HEFCE
that looks at the significance of figures because that is very
important to look at trends and to look at whether the figures
are significant or not? We have had experience with other departments
where the statisticians are very low in numbers on the ground
and yet many copious figures come out of there ostensibly to dictate
policy.
Professor Eastwood: I have got
two responses to that. The first is that the responsibility to
us for the collection of most of these key data lies with the
Higher Education Statistics Agency, its reputation is unrivalled.
Within HEFCE we have got an analytical services group, the head
of which is sitting behind me. That is a group of remarkable quality
and remarkable reputation and it does precisely the kinds of things,
Dr Gibson, you are referring to. It does some of them because
it is asked to, it does some of them because it thinks it is a
good idea and it does some of them because it cannot resist the
temptation.
Chairman: I see a pay rise looming there!
On that note, Minister, first of all, can I thank you for your
time this morning and thank you, Professor Eastwood, for your
time also. You have been most generous and most frank with us
and we very much appreciate it. Also, thank you to my Committee.
| 
