| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Henley: I found the amendment rather peculiar because I was at a loss to understand the sudden opposition to a clause which has received a high degree of support. But I now understand that it is a probing amendment. In effect, the noble Lord would like to know what is the difference between accreditation and approval.
Accreditation is what the authority will do. It will accredit a qualification such as a GCSE, A-level, GNVQ, NVQ or whatever. In passing, I assure the noble Lord that NVQs have been a great success. It was a little over a year ago that we saw the award of the millionth NVQ. I imagine that the figure is much higher now. There is an increasing recognition of the NVQ in the workplace. If the noble Lord would care to talk to
employers, he would find that they speak in glowing terms about the motivational effect that that qualification has on their workforce.In this context, approval is what the Secretary of State will do in saying which qualifications may be provided with the use of specified public funding or for pupils of compulsory school age. Obviously, we anticipate different lists for different purposes; for example, for pre-16 schooling or for TEC-funded training. With that explanation, I hope that the noble Lord will withdraw the amendment.
Lord Tope: I thank the Minister for that explanation. I did not intend to cast aspersions on NVQs and I hope it was not taken in that way. As the Minister identified correctly, this is a probing amendment to seek clarification. I shall read carefully in Hansard what he said and consider the matter further if appropriate. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Morris of Castle Morris moved Amendment No. 162H:
The noble Lord said: In speaking to this amendment, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 164A and Amendment No. 164B will be spoken to by my noble friend Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede.
Amendment No. 162H raises the issue of the availability of mechanisms for individual people to acquire qualifications. A wide variety of ways of gaining credit are needed like those mapped in the Further Education Development Agency's work on a credit framework. People need to have ways of getting previous experience and achievement recognised for credit. That is an enormously important incentive in attracting people to particular forms of qualification. As I found so often in university work, they placed a great deal of stress on the credit that they were given or not given for what in many cases might have been half a lifetime of previous, relevant experience.
People need to be able to carry credit with them between institutions, not necessarily in the very mechanistic way of the American university credit-transfer system but in something approaching that; in other words, they need learning on the job to be recognised as having a worth and a value towards further studying. Part-time students may need to take qualifications a little at a time.
Amendment No. 164A has been tabled simply to test whether a loophole exists in Clause 40(5). That subsection disapplies the first five functions listed earlier in Clause 40 from qualifications awarded or authenticated by institutions within the higher education sector, except where those qualifications have gone through the accreditation process which QCA will establish. So, in that sense, it is a probing amendment.
Observers have pointed to a potential loophole in the regulatory framework. The intention to ring-fence degree work within universities and the higher education
The point of Amendment No. 164A is, therefore, to establish whether or not the fear which some observers have that a university would be able to authenticate a course offered by another institution, such as the sixth-form college, is well founded. It is an important amendment because I can assure Members of the Committee that universities are now in such a hard-pressed position for resources of any kind that they are grasping for almost anything legal which will allow them to bring in a certain amount of money. They are looking for every possible means of accreditation and validation of courses almost anywhere. I do not say--because I do not believe it--that standards are, therefore, dropped; they are not, except in one or two doubtful cases which have already been dealt with. However, because of that pressure the amendment becomes particularly relevant to the work of the QCA and the accreditation of qualifications. I beg to move.
Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede: I shall speak to Amendment No. 164B, which forms part of this grouping. The intention behind the amendment is to draw to the Minister's attention one aspect of the Bill which was not debated in another place and which has not, so far, been debated in this Committee. Tucked away in Clause 40 of the Bill is something which may adversely affect the way in which chartered professional bodies discharge their responsibilities.
The amendment is a short one and would add the words,
after the words "higher education sector". To illustrate the case for the amendment, I shall use such prominent examples as the Royal Society of Chemistry or the Institution of Mining & Metallurgy (of which I am a Fellow).
Both of those bodies award and authenticate their qualifications. For example, the Royal Society of Chemistry validates courses in a number of universities and colleges throughout the country, which lead directly to admission to the society as either a licentiate member or a graduate member. These are both processional categories of membership of the society. The licentiate membership is equivalent to a pass degree in chemistry, and the graduate membership is equivalent to an honours degree in chemistry.
The main point is that, in the case of the Royal Society of Chemistry, this is something that it has been entrusted to do for over 100 years. It has been authenticating such courses and awarding these qualifications in one form or another since the 19th century under the terms of its charter.
I understand that the Government are now proposing, in Clause 37 of the Bill, to establish the QCA, whose job it will be, inter alia, to review and accredit certain
Chartered professional bodies have some points of similarity with the position of universities. The Royal Society of Chemistry's role is a good example. Like many universities which were established by charter (including most of the older universities in the United Kingdom), the Royal Society of Chemistry was also established by charter almost 150 years ago; in fact, its first charter dates from 1848. Like most of the older universities, the society (together with my own professional body and several others) has long operated under chartered status approved by the Privy Council. Under the terms of its Royal Charter the society is required,
To help it fulfil its charter obligations the society is authorised to,
The Royal Society of Chemistry, together with the other chartered professional bodies, has therefore been accorded exactly the same authority to award and authenticate its qualifications as have the universities. This amendment would clarify their position and safeguard that role.
Lord Henley: These are interesting and, I think, finely balanced amendments. I shall, if I may, speak to each in turn.
Amendment No. 162H is intended to impose a duty on the QCA to secure a sufficient supply of qualifications for individuals seeking them. I appreciate the intention behind the amendment, but I think it could create substantial practical difficulties. First, there would be a clear tension between this provision and the responsibilities of the various funding authorities to secure adequate or sufficient facilities for education. Secondly, it might well result in the QCA requiring awarding bodies to provide qualifications tailored to single individuals, without regard to there being a "best fit" alternative qualification available, to costs or to the desirability of there being a transparent, easily understood framework.
Amendment No. 164A would bring every sub-degree qualification offered by an HE institution within the QCA's remit. The existence of such qualifications is a growing feature of HE, as the noble Lord, Lord Morris, made clear. One has only to think of the Open University to be aware of the growing importance and value of such provision. And while all bets are off on the future direction of HE provision until Sir Ron Dearing reports, I think we could hazard a guess that any solutions he and his committee come up with might well involve an increased focus on such provision as an
Finally, Amendment No. 164B to which the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, spoke is designed to put qualifications offered by professional bodies on the same footing as qualifications offered by HE institutions. Again, I have some sympathy with the views of the noble Lord. The professional bodies are valued upholders of standards and an important safeguard of professional integrity. They have not, however, been treated in the same way as HE institutions because of the overarching requirement for the QCA to promote coherence. Many lower level NVQs feed into higher level professional qualifications. We want the articulation to be as clear as possible--hence the requirement, in particular, to keep such qualifications under review.
I hope that with these explanations the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his amendments.
Lord Morris of Castle Morris: If I may say so, the noble Lord the Minister has made a much better fist of trying to get rid of our amendments on this occasion than he did on the last.
I am not entirely satisfied, but I take some of the points he made. Without forfeiting my right to come back to this on Report after I have seen in print what the Minister said, I beg leave to withdraw the amendments.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 162J not moved.]
Page 34, line 18, at end insert ("; and
( ) to secure adequate qualification mechanisms for individuals seeking qualifications.").
"or by professional bodies established by Charter",
"to establish, uphold and advance the standards of qualification, competence and conduct of those who practise chemistry as a profession".
"cause examinations to be held",
"issue formal documents certifying competency in chemistry".
10.45 p.m.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page