Stephen
Williams: There is
form.
Mr.
Hayes: I was trying to be generous, as we have only just
begun our work, but the hon. Gentleman is right. There is form by
Governments of different persuasions, and certainly in this case, by a
Government of only one persuasion. In 2000, apprenticeships were
rebadged to increase their number. The House of Lords Economic Affairs
Committee said that most of that increase was the
“result of
converting government-supported programmes of work-based learning into
apprenticeship”.
It is not just the
Opposition, in this instance in alliance with the Liberal Democrats,
who are suspicious about the definition of apprenticeships. All kinds
of other authoritative bodies and organisations have looked at the
background and concluded that it is tempting for Ministers to rebadge
training as apprenticeships, given that they have set out an ambition
to increase the number impressively and quickly, and all the more so
given that they have established an entitlement to apprenticeships, as
my hon. Friend the Member for Beverley and Holderness made clear in a
pertinent intervention. It would be immensely embarrassing for
Ministers, if one, two or three years down the line, it became clear
that such an entitlement was nothing more than an empty promise. One
therefore imagines that in their less noble moments they might consider
rebadging other training as apprenticeships to avoid that
eventuality.
Mr.
Stuart: What if there is such a failure? If a shortfall in
the number of apprenticeships against the number set down in the Bill
produced no diminution of quality, how could a learner who wanted an
apprenticeship, as promised in the Bill, demand an apprenticeship?
Would a judicial remedy be
available?
Mr.
Hayes: My suspicion is that the Government have not
anticipated the eventuality that my hon. Friend describes. If an
entitlement is established with no realistic prospect of being able to
deliver it, it might be challenged by, say, a learner who is desperate
to be an apprentice but who is unable to find a place. I mentioned my
constituency in rural Lincolnshire where, frankly, the chances of
delivering an apprenticeship entitlement, given the local economic
profile, are hard to imagine. I do not want to be unnecessarily
sceptical, but it is hard to imagine growing apprenticeship numbers
sufficiently in my constituency and many others to deliver speedily on
the entitlement. Potential learners will be appalled if that happens,
which is why I suspect that it is entirely possible that the Government
will change the definition of an apprenticeship to suit their policy
ambitions; I am not citing the noble ambitions that the Minister began
with, but the rather less impressive ones with which he
ended. Because
we suspect that the Government will attempt to swell apprenticeships by
adding training for existing employees that is not sufficiently
work-based, or training, particularly in the public sector, that should
not count as an apprenticeship, we intend to press the amendment to a
Division. This is an important matter, and it should be on the record.
Given the Minister’s bold assertion that he agrees that this
lies at the heart of the definition of an apprenticeship, I look
forward to his voting with the Opposition, so that we can begin, as a
Committee, as one in our
ambition. Question
put, That the amendment be made.
The
Committee divided: Ayes 7, Noes
10.
Division
No.
1]
Question
accordingly negatived.
Mr.
Hayes: On a point of order, Mrs. Humble. Can we
divide on amendment
47?
The
Chairman: Amendment 47 will be called when we reach the
clause to which it
applies. Clause
1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 2
ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
3Issue
of certificates by the English certifying authority:
supplementary Amendment
made: 151, in
clause 3, page 3, line 10, leave
out from ‘authorising’ to end of line 11 and
insert ‘the English certifying authority to
charge a fee for supplying a copy of an apprenticeship
certificate.’.—(Mr.
Simon.) This amendment is consequent on
amendment
152. Question
proposed, That the clause, as amended, stand part of the
Bill.
5.30
pm
Mr.
Hayes: Our earlier remarks showed that we have some doubts
about clause 3. Although there was some discussion about the matter,
will the Minister set the clause in context so that we can explore
those doubts more
fully?
Mr.
Simon: I am not sure whether I can add much to what we
said earlier. The clause allows the authority designated to issue
apprenticeship certificates to charge a fee for doing so, if authorised
by regulations. It also contains a power to make regulations to supply,
and charge for, copies of such certificates. As I said earlier, I
assure the Committee that, while the clause includes a power for the
Secretary of State to make regulations to enable a certifying authority
to charge a fee, we expect that the public funding that we make
available to the National Apprenticeship Service will be sufficient to
cover the costs of issuing certificates. However, we want to ensure
that we have the ability to make regulations that will allow fees to be
charged in the future to meet, for example, the administrative costs of
issuing duplicate or replacement
certificates.
Mr.
Hayes: In that spirit—the Minister spoke about this
earlier and gave important assurances that are now on the
record—will he be clear about the guidance that will be offered?
Enabling charges in the circumstances that he described for a duplicate
certificate and facilitating charges at some unspecified future time
seem qualitatively different from the issue of certificates per se. The
Minister clearly stated that that is not the intention, but it would
be helpful if he gave some assurance that the guidance and regulations
will make the purpose in this part of the Bill
clear.
Mr.
Simon: I am not sure whether I understand what kind of
guidance the hon. Gentleman means. It is pretty straightforward that
the Bill provides a power for the Secretary of State to issue a
regulation giving the certifying authority the ability to make a charge
at some point in future. We have no intention to make such a charge at
present. Sector skills councils currently charge £30 per
apprenticeship certificate and any future charge for duplicates would
be at cost and not-for-profit; I unequivocally state that that is the
current situation. The Bill allows the Secretary of State a power to
make a regulation in future, and I have been quite clear on the
circumstances in which such a power could be used. I do not see how we
could give any more
guidance.
Mr.
Hayes: I do not want to do this matter to death. The
Minister has been clear and I take him at his word. Our amendments,
including one to delete this whole part of the Bill—it was not
selected—were stimulated by worries about charging per se.
However, the Minister has made it sufficiently clear that that is not
the intention. On the face of it, the Bill could be used to trigger
such a regime, but I am confident that he has no intention of bringing
it into being. As Ministers, we certainly would not do so. On that
basis, I am happy to say no more.
Question
put and agreed to.
Clause 3,
as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
4The
English certifying
authority Amendment
made: 152, in
clause 4, page 3, line 13, leave
out from ‘authority”’ to end of line 23 and
insert ‘means the Chief Executive of Skills
Funding.’.—(Mr.
Simon.) The effect of this amendment is that
the Chief Executive of Skills Funding will be the ‘English
certifying authority’ for the purpose of the issue of
apprenticeship
certificates. Clause
4, as amended, ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clauses
5, 6 and 7 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
8The
Welsh certifying
authority Amendments
made: 153, in
clause 8, page 5, line 12, leave
out ‘by the Welsh Ministers’ and insert ‘under
this section’. This amendment is consequent
on amendment
156. Amendment
154, in
clause 8, page 5, line 15, leave
out ‘by the Welsh Ministers’ and insert ‘under
this section’. This amendment is consequent
on amendment
156. Amendment
155, in
clause 8, page 5, line 17, leave
out ‘by the Welsh Ministers’ and insert ‘under
this section’. This amendment is consequent
on amendment
156. Amendment
156, in
clause 8, page 5, line 20, at
end insert— ‘( )
“Designated” means designated by an order made by the
Welsh Ministers.’.—(Mr.
Simon.) This technical amendment provides for
designation of the Welsh certifying authority to be made by order of
the Welsh
Ministers. Question
proposed, That the clause, as amended, stand part of the
Bill.
Mr.
Hayes: According to the explanatory notes,
clause 8 provides
“that the
certifying authority for apprenticeships in Wales will be persons
designated for that purpose by the Welsh
Ministers.” Ministers
will be aware that, in its report on the draft Bill, the Innovation,
Universities, Science and Skills Committee expressed concern about the
lack of consultation on powers provided under the legislation with
respect to Wales. The Government have tabled a series of amendments to
clause 8. The Select Committee concluded:
“As
the legislation would apply to Wales, we wrote to the Welsh Affairs
Committee and the National Assembly for Wales to invite their views. In
reply, both the Welsh Affairs Committee and the Enterprise and Learning
Committee of the Assembly asked fundamental questions about the
application of the provisions in the draft Bill to Wales. The
supporting documentation with the draft Bill did not explain how the
proposed provisions would be implemented in Wales—the draft Bill
would, for example, impose duties on the Learning and Skills Council
but it has an England only remit—and no reference was made to
apprenticeships in Wales. The Enterprise and Learning Committee was of
the opinion that the UK Government’s legislative approach was
‘unsatisfactory and does not reflect well on the UK Government
or the Welsh Assembly Government.’ The content and tone of the
representations from the two committees raised concerns that
consultation on the application of the draft Bill in Wales was
inadequate and that it required further
consideration.” We
are concerned, and have raised the matter with the Minister. He will
know that when similar concerns were expressed to the Minister for
Schools and Learners, he reinforced our concerns with his answer
that
“you could take
more time in coming up with firm draft where you have ironed out
everything with Wales and the Welsh Assembly Government, or you can
publish a Bill and have this sort of scrutiny, while we carry on our
discussions with the Welsh Assembly Government, and then once it comes
into something that is then introduced to Parliament...we will at
that point have to be clear with our friends in the Welsh Assembly
Government which bits they want and which bits they do
not.”
That was not one of his
more articulate moments, as I am sure that he would be only too happy
to acknowledge.
We have grave
concerns that the Department has treated consultation with the Welsh
Assembly Government and the National Assembly for Wales as an
afterthought. The consultation on the operation of apprenticeships in
Wales and the application of draft legislation in Wales have clearly
been inadequate and we recommend the Government rectify that deficiency
before the provisions in the Bill—
The
Minister for Schools and Learners (Jim Knight): I did not
catch something that the hon. Gentleman said. How did he think that the
Welsh Assembly Government had been
treated?
Mr.
Hayes: I was quoting the Minister of State’s
response when the matter was raised with him. My own contention is that
the matter was not handled properly in terms of consultation and that
was clearly a view reflected by those in the Assembly and those
associated with Wales in the House. If they have concerns, I regard it
as my duty to make those concerns known at this stage of
scrutiny.
It would not
be the first time that the Government have run into problems in that
regard, as the Minister well knows. In previous Bills, the Welsh
dimension, in terms of the application of legislation and the nature of
consultation, has been a minefield for Government
Ministers. I hope that the Minister will be able to offer assurances
that those matters have been dealt with properly, that the concerns
expressed by others have been listened to and acted on, and that there
is absolute clarity about the way in which the Bill will apply in
Wales. Unless we have those assurances, how can we possibly agree to
clause
8? | 
