| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Dubs: My Lords, will my noble friend comment on the work of the Open University in providing education for people of all ages at a price that is within peoples' pockets?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, indeed, I pay enormous tribute to the Open University and say to my noble friend that the existing position of repayable loans for part-time students will be replaced with a non-repayable grant within a means-tested system that will apply to all students, regardless of age.
Lord Barnett: My Lords, does my noble friend accept that in practice the Higher Education Bill on top-up fees discriminates against part-time workers? Why on earth can she not concede that something needs to be done now, in respect of part-time workers as students, because so many need to pursue their further education for themselves and the country? If ageism is to be defeated, that should apply equally to allow the over-50s such as myself to study.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Surely not, my Lords. As I gallop towards that age I am well aware of the matter.
The Bill does not simply concern top-up fees; it is also about a new approach to the funding of higher education and it contains many other measures which I look forward to debating in your Lordships' House. Also, regarding my comments about part-time higher education students, it is worth reiterating that we are replacing loans with a grant. Eight grants will be available, as opposed to six loans. There will be no age limits for grants. We believe that we have a good package. Regarding other students being able to access courses, we have a good story to tell on access to further education for people of all ages—and rightly so.
Baroness Sharp of Guildford: My Lords, does the Minister agree that although she is replacing loans with grants for students at the Open University, the lack of availability of loans to those students discriminates against people who wish to study part time to acquire a degree? Given that the Open University offers by far and away the most cost-effective form of degree training in this country, why are we discriminating against its students?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I am not sure that I agree with the noble Baroness that we discriminate against those students. The point of the present loans system is that a loan has to be repaid. As I believe I said in my Answer, those older people who are able to verify by declaration that they intend to go back to work and will be able to pay back the loan are included. Although we keep the matter under review and I am aware of the work being carried out in this field, it is important that we look at the resources available for higher education and where we need to enable our students to access the available loans and grants. I believe that we have the balance right.
Baroness Warwick of Undercliffe: My Lords, I welcome the changes that the Minister described to support part-time students. Does she agree that part-time students form the key to our aims of widening participation, and that the costs of teaching such students should be borne in mind in the Higher Education Funding Council's allocation to universities, particularly since part-time students will not be able to take advantage of the proposed graduate contributions scheme?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I agree with my noble friend. It is important that we recognise the contribution of part-time students to the Government's aspiration to ensure that people are able to access higher education. I agree that we would expect that to form a part of the way in which the Higher Education Funding Council thinks about its allocation.
Baroness Seccombe: My Lords, can the Minister tell the House what representations the Government have received regarding financial arrangements for these students?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, the noble Baroness will be well aware that Age Concern recently
published a report, and the department is currently considering its response. I would be happy to write to the noble Baroness with more detail of those individuals and groups that may have been in touch with the Government. We are aware of the work of the House of Lords Committee, and that of the noble Baroness, Lady Greengross, Age Concern and other organisations with which we have an active relationship. We keep these issues under review.
Baroness Howe of Idlicote: My Lords, does the Minister recognise that many students who sadly drop out of full-time higher education turn to the Open University to enable them to complete their degree? I declare an interest as a past vice-chairman of the Open University. Does the Minster agree that unless and until the current plans are changed, those universities' part-time studies will be left at a trading disadvantage and that the present arrangement discriminates against the disadvantaged students whom it most aims to help?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, we have addressed that issue to a degree in the package that we have described for part-time students. It is important to recognise that it is not only through higher education that those aged 50 and over are able to be involved in lifelong learning. For example, 25 per cent of all enrolments on adult education courses in November 2002 were made by individuals aged 60 or over. It is important that we think across the piece in terms of the education opportunities for all our citizens and our older citizens in particular in this context.
Baroness Greengross: My Lords—
Child Protection Strategy
2.52 p.m.
Baroness Walmsley asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they plan to inform their child protection strategy by the experience of the European countries which afford children protection from assault in the home equal to that enjoyed by adults.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, the Government have no plans at present to remove the reasonable chastisement defence, as we believe that the law as it stands on physical punishment of children reflects the right balance between protecting children and allowing parents to make their own choices about discipline in the home. The Government are aware of the experience of other European countries, and we take this into account in the ongoing monitoring of our current policy.
Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, I thank the Minister for her Answer. Will she accept that in those countries that have given children equal protection, along with a lot of public education and help for parents, the benefits have been enormous, including a reduction in the number of prosecutions of parents and a reduction in the number of compulsory interventions from social services? Public opinion is now overwhelmingly in favour of the policy. In the 10th report of the Joint Committee on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, it was proposed that the UK Government review the experiences of those countries that have given equal protection to children. Do the Government intend to act on that recommendation?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, when one looks across at our European colleagues it is interesting, as the noble Baroness rightly said, to look at the implications of the changes they have made and what we can see happening in issues around children—it is an important part of the work that we do. In response to her final question about the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, we keep a watchful eye and we are consistently in conversation with our colleagues in different European countries about their experiences. It is hard to look for causal relationships in these areas, as one would expect. None the less, it is interesting. As the noble Baroness said, public opinion in different countries has led to different initiatives being taken. In this country, there is a reasonably strong view that the position of the Government is correct.
Lord Laming: My Lords, would the Minister do everything that she can to remind the front-line services that the Children Act 1989 places a duty on services to put the well-being of children in a paramount position? That means listening to the child rather than to the wishes of the adults in the child's life.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I could not agree more strongly with the noble Lord, Lord Laming. It is absolutely critical that we recognise that nothing that I have said suggests in any way that we should be anything other than ever-watchful for abuse of children under all circumstances.
Baroness David: My Lords, could the Minister please try to use her influence to persuade the Government to make use of the Children Bill to bring forward legislation that totally complies with the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which have both criticised the Government's attitude about hitting children? Surely she could do something to get us in line with the rest of Europe.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I look forward to the introduction of the Bill. I surmise that it will not be me who brings forward this issue on our deliberations, but it will arise in the course of our debate. I look forward to those debates.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |