Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
What we need is not fake announcements, but a response to the recession built on a demand-led training system. We need opportunities for people to reskill and upskill. That means freeing further education from the byzantine bureaucracy of the LSC and its successors
and rebuilding the broken infrastructure of adult and community learning. Adult and community learning does not simply fulfil an economic purpose; it also changes lives by changing life chances, it feeds civic engagement and it builds democratic citizenship. We need to boost the number of apprenticeships and the teaching and testing of those practical competences that are needed.
That is why the Conservatives will create a self-regulated FE sector, funded by a single streamlined agency. That is why we will put 100,000 more apprenticeships in the system each year and give a £2,000 bonus for each apprentice employed at a small or medium-sized enterprise. It is why we will put in place an all-age independent careers service as advocated by the hon. Member for Bristol, West in his speech and by us in our Green Paper. In place of failure, fallacies and falsehood, we need a fitting response to the recession, a proper concentration on skills, a determination to allow people to fulfil their potential and to feed the economic good that we seek as a House and, I hope, as a nation.
There are many people who criticise the Minister. Some people say that he is not up to the job, many of those on his own Benches. I will not repeat the claims that have been made on websites and elsewhere not because they are simply rude and unparliamentary, but because I do not believe them. I think that the hon. Gentleman is going to stand up today and acknowledge much of what I said. I think that he is going to apologise to the adult learners who have lost their places. I think he is going to admit that apprenticeship numbers are declining. I think he is going to argue that the Conservatives are right about the need for a streamlined system for the funding and management of skills. I have faith in the Minister, even if others do not. In place of Labours fear and strife, we need a Government true to their principles, honest about their intentions and determined to succeed, not for themselves but for the people they serve. We need new hope, a new Britain, a new Conservative Government.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills (Mr. Siôn Simon): Many people have spoken this afternoon and several contributors have said that they found the debate rather disappointing. I think that, with the exception of that from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, the contributions from Front Benchers have been very disappointing. [Interruption.] For those who have been here throughout the debate, however, the contributions from Back Benchers have been interesting, constructive and worthwhileand that is almost as true of the Opposition Back Benchers as of the Government Back Benchers.
As for what we heard about apprenticeships from both Opposition Front-Bench teams, all I will say is that it was extraordinary nonsense. The hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) said that we needed more apprenticeships, especially for those aged 19 and above. In 1996, when the Conservatives were in charge, there were 67,000 apprenticeships; last year, there were 225,000and next year there will be an additional 35,000 specifically in response to the recession. Yet Conservative Members tell us that we need more!
Rob Marris: Does my hon. Friend, like me, find it shocking that the Conservative Front-Bench team, in the motion and the winding-up speech, today made seven large spending commitments? The Conservatives will not put a price on them, yet their leader is saying that they will cut funding by £610 million. Is that not shameless of them?
Mr. Simon: It is shameless, but it is not shocking. The hon. Member for Havant wants more apprenticeships for the over-19s, yet if he had his £610 million spending cuts, there would be no new apprenticeships for that age group and there would still be £427 million of cuts to find from the science budget, the rest of the skills budget and the universities budget.
Mr. Hayes: I was very nice when I spoke about the hon. Gentleman. Will he make it clear whether the number of level 3 apprenticeships has risen or fallen on this Governments watch?
Mr. Simon: The hon. Gentleman was not nice; he was just not quite as rude as he was previously. Let us be clear about that; let us also be clear that the total number of apprenticeships has gone up massively on this Governments watch; and let us be clear that the difference between level 2 and level 3 apprenticeships is a matter for business, not the Government, which the hon. Gentleman would know if he were a bit more interested in government and a bit less interested in cheap point scoring.
Speaking for the Liberal Front-Bench team, the hon. Member for Bristol, West (Stephen Williams) said that for the last 15 or 20 years there has been no recession. I thought that an interesting choice of phrase. It made the position seem a bit random, as though it did not matter which party was in power. The truth is that for the last 12 to 15 years, since the end of the last Tory recession, there has been no recession.
The hon. Gentleman said that during his three and a half years as a Member of Parliament, he had observed that Members never mentioned the Leitch report in debates such as this. I was surprised when he said that, because in the mere four months for which I have held this position, I have found that people go on and on about the Leitch report. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we remain committed to the reports underlying thrust and ambitions, such as the creation of 400,000 apprenticeships in England by 2020.
The hon. Gentleman also said that the thrust of the Leitch report was upskilling, whereas the current challenge related to reskilling. His hon. Friend the Chair of the Select Committee, the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis), made the same point later in the debate. I do not see a contradiction between the two. I think that we need to reskill now, at the same time as upskilling for the future. It has to be the same job, and I think that we are doing that job.
I was not sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley, Central (Mr. Illsley) entirely understood what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said about capital expenditure. I thought my right hon. Friend made it quite clear that there was no freeze in the capital programme, and that none of the money was not being spent. In fact, £110 million is being brought forward to this year and £100 million to the following year. The
programme is being accelerated. What has happened is that expectations have not been managed as they should have been, and there is now more demand in the system than can be met in the current budgetary period. That is what the Secretary of State apologised for, and that is what the independent Foster review is examining.
Stephen Williams: The Minister says that the problem has been caused by too much in the way of expectations. Who built up those expectations?
Mr. Simon: That is what the independent review is about. That is what the Secretary of State has said. We think it unacceptable that some colleges were allowed to believe that their programmes would go ahead according to a timetable that it now seems may not go ahead. That is what we are looking into and trying to put right.
Mr. Burrowes: Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Simon: No, I will not. I have no time.
My hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley, Central cited the specific case of a college in his constituency. I understand that problems of the same type have been experienced by other Members. A multi-phase project received approval in principle for all its phases, but detailed approval was needed for each phase. We are sensitive to that problem, and I am discussing ways of finding solutions to it with the Learning and Skills Council. My hon. Friend and I were due to meet and discuss the matter, but were not able to do so. I should be happy to rearrange the meeting.
Mary Creagh: The new Whitwood campus, in the neighbouring constituency of Pontefract and Castleford, will open in a couple of weeks. May I ask my hon. Friend to visit that brand-new vocational training campus, and to speed up approval for the city centre campus in Wakefield about which he and I have spoken in private?
Mr. Simon: I am very grateful for that kind invitation, but I suspect that my hon. Friend has so many Cabinet Ministers on her doorstep that she can do better than me. However, if she is still stuck, I should be more than happy to come.
The hon. Member for Banbury (Tony Baldry) made an insightful and thoughtful contribution. I do not think I disagreed with anything that he said. He made the case for bite-sized chunks of learning; he made the case for unitisation of the qualifications credit framework, which we are moving towards; he made the case for replacing the LSC with a slimmed-down, more demand-led, more responsive body, which is exactly what we are doing; and he made the case for strategic skills. In fact, he talked such good sense about those matters that I am beginning to wonder whether he really is a proper Tory.
My hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Judy Mallaber) is an extraordinary representative who speaks for the grass roots in her constituency. She showed us that further education really is at the heart of the communityacross the country and in Amber Valley, where she is an outstanding Member of Parliamentand that further education colleges are for the whole community, from 16-year-olds to 106-year-olds, from the first steps towards literacy and numeracy to degrees, one in 10 of which are delivered in further education settings. She
gave us concrete examples of the fact that the billions of pounds of investment in maintenance of peoples lives to which the Government are committed to makes a real difference on the ground.
The hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Mr. Taylor) enlightened us all about how it feels not to be Carol Vorderman. He said that he wanted the capital programme pause, as it has been called, to be used for the purpose of renegotiation and seeking better value. I am not sure that that is what we want to do. I think that we want as little renegotiation as possible, and as much business as usual as possible.
Mr. Hayes: Will the Minister give way?
Last years National Audit Office report was extraordinary. It was a report such as the NAO rarely produces, unreservedly praising the work of the Building Colleges for the Future programme. I think that the programme has delivered value for money so far. It has certainly delivered some outstanding buildings.
My hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Tom Levitt) spoke of his own experience of the disastrous effect of a Tory recession on skills, employees and employers, contrasting it with the resilience that he observes on the ground in his constituency and the Labour response to a global downturn. He spoke of Tarmacs Jesuitical determination to invest in skills during a recession. He is right: business and Labour are in tune on skills. It is the Tories who are all over the place.
A member of the Select Committee who is no longer in the Chamber described what I consider to be a false dichotomy between investing in skills now and investing in future skills. I shall discuss the detail of what he said when he returns. My hon. Friend the Member for South Swindon (Anne Snelgrove) spoke outstandingly on behalf of her constituents. Like me, she is a car MP. She told us of the difficulties experienced by Honda, and how the Government are working with Hondajust as they are with Nissanto make skills part of the car industrys response to recession.
The hon. Member for Northampton, South (Mr. Binley) told us that there was too much political point scoring in the debate. I can only suggest to him that if his taste for political point scoring is not great, rather than attending Tory Opposition day debates he should try to get on to the Committee that will consider the Children, Skills and Learning Bill, which I think is about to begin its work and will run until, I think, 2017.
I first met my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, South (Alan Simpson) before either of us entered the House. I have therefore waited almost 20 years to be able to say this. I agreed with every word that he said. I quaked a bit when he stood up, but I was grateful for his support.
As a Government, we are doing all that we can to help employers, workers and families through this difficult time. We are investing £4.5 billion a year in crafting the skills base that the economy needs. Since 2006, Train to Gain alone has supported the training of more than 780,000 people and 120,000 businesses, enabling 370,000 individuals to obtain formal qualifications. We have
allocated £158 million to pay for 35,000 more apprenticeship places with major employers such as Sainsburys, Tesco, Superdrug and Phones4U. We have allocated an additional £350 million to Flexibilities and Train to Gain. We have trebled the number of personal and community development learning programmes.
We will not slash £610 million from our budgets as the Tories would, because we know that the answer to recession is investing in people. We will not leave generations on the scrap heap of unemployment as the Tories did, and we will not leave hard-working families to face the world recession alone as the Tories would.
Question put (Standing Order No. 31(2)), That the original words stand part of the Question.
The House proceeded to a Division.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): I ask the Serjeant at Arms to investigate the delay in the No Lobby.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |