| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Earl Russell asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What would be the cost of ensuring that all students should be eligible for either educational or social security support.[HL5377]
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: So far as full-time higher education students are concerned, the great majority receive student support. The exceptions are some intercalating students, although a number of
intercalating students who suspend their studies are now eligible for social security benefits or for student loans at the discretion of their LEAs. We have no cost figures on the extension of student support to all such students because information on overall numbers of particular categories of intercalating students is not collected by LEAs or centrally. Costs would vary depending on whether extended support was in the form of repayable higher education student loans or non-repayable social security benefits.For other categories of students, there would be additional costs in extending social security benefits to full-time further education students but part-time higher and part-time further education students are already eligible to claim them.
Comprehensive Spending Review: Resources for Education
Baroness Sharp of Guildford asked Her Majesty's Government:
- For each of the three years covered by the Comprehensive Spending Review (2003–06), how much money has been allocated in England for (a) schools, (b) early years provision in schools and (c) other early years provision.[HL5635]
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Skills will take the decisions on the distribution of the additional resources provided by the spending review between and within the various sectors of education later in the year.
Schools: Software Expenditure
Baroness Buscombe asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How much money schools currently spend on digital learning resources; and to what extent this figure is likely to change in light of the BBC's digital curriculum proposal; and[HL5647]
What plans they have to make the N M Rothschild and CEPA reports available; and what the reports say about the likely impact of BBC's digital curriculum proposal on competition in the digital learning resources market;[HL5648]
Whether they will consider the likely impact on competition in the digital learning resources market when considering the BBC's digital curriculum proposal.[HL5649]
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The department does not routinely collect data on total spend on software. However the 2001 ICT in Schools Survey did report that in 1999–2000 schools in England spent an average of £800 per primary school and £5,230 per secondary on software and online content. As part of the Curriculum Online programme we are providing schools in England with £50 million for the year 2002–03 to spend on digital learning resources
showcased by a range of commercial providers on the Curriculum Online portal.My right honourable Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport is considering the BBC's digital curriculum proposal in accordance with her department's published guidelines on proposed new BBC public services. The matters taken into account under the guidelines include the likely impact of the service on commercial services already in the market and on potential future services.
The main points of the Rothschild report were included in the Curriculum Online consultation paper issued by the department in April 2001. The rest of the report, which reviews the future development and financing of the National Grid for Learning, is commercial in confidence and cannot therefore be made public. The work is Rothschild's intellectual property.
Research Machines filed a judicial review claim with the Government over the BBC's digital curriculum activities in April 2002. The Rothschild report was made available as part of the litigation brought by RM on litigation disclosure terms for the purposes of that litigation only.
CEPA's report on the market on digital learning materials draws on discussions and commercially sensitive information provided in confidence by the organisations interviewed. This report was commissioned as an internal document to inform the policy relating to Curriculum Online and its findings were never intended for publication.
There are no plans for further dissemination of either report.
NVQ Level II
Baroness Sharp of Guildford asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they will estimate the cost to an individual of obtaining an NVQ level II qualification[HL5658]
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: People who achieve their NVQ level 2 usually do so either through government-supported training, or with the positive support of their employer. Those people who obtain NVQs through the government-supported route are not required to pay for the costs of their training. For employers, there is no requirement to disclose how much they contribute to the costs of supporting individual employees.
It is not possible to estimate the average cost of an NVQ level 2 because of the wide variation between occupational areas and time taken to achieve the qualification.
Students: Social Security Benefits
Earl Russell asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How many days after withdrawal from their courses students become eligible for social security benefits other than crisis loans, and[HL5376]
Whether they accept the objective of the Social Security Housing Committee that all intercalating students should be eligible either for education support or for social security support, and [HL5372]
Which recommendations of the Report of the Social Security Advisory Committee on the draft Social Security Amendment (Students) Regulations 2000 (Cm 4739) they have now adopted; which they have not adopted; and what would be the cost of adopting those recommendations, and [HL5388]
Whether they consider that students who are single parents and whose youngest child reaches 16 before the conclusion of their course should remain eligible for social security benefits until the conclusion of their course; and what the likely cost of such eligibility would be, and [HL5389]
Whether the concept of "last day of course" (as referred to in paragraphs 43-46 of the Report by the Social Security Advisory Committee (Cm 4739)) is one which cannot easily be applied to postgraduate students, and [HL5390]
Whether they accept the view of the Social Security Advisory Committee (Cm 4739, paragraph 36) that "the Government should recognise the wide variety of circumstances which can give rise to necessary breaks in full-time study, switches to part-time study or examination failure", and [HL5391]
Whether they accept the view of the Social Security Advisory Committee (Cm 4739, paragraph 48) that those who lose exemption from council tax should thereby acquire liability for council tax benefit; and, if they see any justifiable exemptions from this principle, on what grounds. [HL5392]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Baroness Hollis of Heigham): A student becomes eligible to claim an income-related benefit immediately they have abandoned, completed or been dismissed from a full-time course of study. Students studying part-time are not excluded from claiming income-related benefits whilst studying. All students may claim other social security benefits subject to their satisfying the normal conditions of entitlement for the benefit concerned.
In March 1998 the Social Security Amendment (Students) Regulations 2000 were formally referred to the Social Security Advisory Committee. The regulations amended social security legislation to make clear the policy intention that full-time students are not eligible for income-related benefits (income support, jobseeker's allowance, housing benefit and council tax benefit) until they complete, abandon or are dismissed from their course. This is because support for students should come instead from the educational maintenance system, which is designed for their needs. However, in recognition that some
students have costs unassociated with their study, certain students, such as disabled students or lone parents, can claim income-related benefits.In reporting their views on the proposed 1998 regulations to the Secretary of State, following the referral, the committee made three recommendations. We were unable to accept the recommendations in full and it is not possible to estimate the likely cost of adopting those recommendations we did not accept. However, we did make the following concessions.
We recognise that there are a number of reasons why a student might interrupt their course of study, but we believe that students have a responsibility to progress as quickly as possible with their studies and for this reason students who interrupt, but do not abandon, a course of full-time study remain ineligible for the income-related benefits and may not have access to student support. In cases of illness however, although there is no mandatory requirement to determine that support is payable where a higher education student is absent after 60 days, the Department for Education and Skills is committed to ensuring that such students continue to receive their support whenever appropriate. Guidance has therefore been issued to educational institutions requesting them to be sympathetic to students in this position and to local education authorities asking them to consider exercising their discretion to extend student support payments.
In addition, students who have, with the permission of their educational establishment, interrupted their course because of illness or caring responsibilities, and who have recovered from that illness or whose caring responsibilities have ended can claim jobseeker's allowance, housing benefit, or council tax benefit as appropriate. They may claim from the date of recovery from illness or the date their caring duties ceased until such time as they have permission to return to their course. However to ensure that the student returns as soon as practicable the period of such a claim is limited to one year.
We also agreed not to amend the definition of "last day of the course" as we had proposed in view of the adverse effect it would have had on some post-graduate students. (Command Paper 4739, government response, paragraphs 21-23). Guidance was issued to decision makers to make clear that post-graduate students who have completed their course of study should not be treated as full-time students. These students will therefore be eligible for council tax benefit unless, in the opinion of the decision maker, they are engaged full-time in writing a thesis or doing associated work such as research.
Students who change from a full-time course to a part-time course and who have had to abandon one to begin the second are able to claim the relevant income-related benefits, as they are no longer full-time students.
In recognition of the additional costs unassociated with their studies that lone parents who are full-time students may have, they continue to be eligible for income support, housing benefit and council tax
benefit. However this eligibility ceases when the youngest child reaches age 16 for income support purposes or when the child reaches age 19 or is no longer in full-time relevant education for housing benefit and council tax benefit.
At age 16 for income support purposes, the child is no longer treated as dependant to the extent that the parent is required to register for employment and is therefore no longer considered to be a vulnerable group student. It would be unfair on other single students, who also have no dependants, if these students remained eligible for income support.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page