14/12/2015 House of Lords

We'll go live to the House of Lords. You can watch coverage of all of

today's business after the daily politics later tonight. According to

the onus, the average income has folded by 22% by 2000 eight, fallen

over that period. The importance of touching on these issues is to

emphasise that employment policy is not about better that it should be

about the quality of jobs, the decent work is the word that is

growing. How wide will its attention span and be on this issue? We have

long signed up to the importance of work and getting people back into

work. We have heard about good works being good for 1's health. The

proposition about work being the best route out of poverty. Without

work benefit support from the government -- 80% of the active

population is an ambitious target to have four full employment. It was

one adopted by the previous Labour government. It was noted as being

ambitious, although progress was being made before the banking crisis

of 2008. We know that the Minister is wary of targets, but can he say

what the government will base its judgement for employment on?

Government would prefer a formulation to affect the implement

a rate should be the highest in the G7. I cannot imagine that this would

satisfy a purist like the Minister. The UK at 73% is somewhere in the

middle behind Germany and Japan, but ahead of the US and France I

believe. Making progress toward full employment must entail the

government is delivering on its commitment to close the implement

gap. The employment gap between employment people and the rest of

the population has been a remarkably stubborn for a number of years. That

statistic, as we have heard, masks a range of different outcomes as we

discussed our debate, and the review produced. The employment rate for

learning disabilities is about 8%, and for those with autism about 15%.

We dad the Mac. It needs a change in public and

employer perception. The highly regarded work choice looked as if it

was an insufficient focus. Any other place, the Minister said that it was

necessary to lower the gap, because it is inextricable from formal

employment. -- full employment. There are rate range of issues that

would stop full employment. Which he outlined the concept as how he would

see that rate to be the target constructed, and the extent to which

he will discuss the range of issues that the Lords have identified? I

will address the amendments relating to self employment. Amendment a 61

it relates to how the minimum income plot in the self employment and how

it works with universal credit. Universal credit supports those on

low incomes, and ensures that work will pay. Self-employment

realistically to financial self-sufficiency compared to other

routes to help businesses. The welfare system is not there to prop

up unproductive or lossmaking businesses. The minimum income plot

is there to incentivize individuals to increase their earnings from sell

the appointment. Those subject to the minimum income plot are exempt

from having to search for or to carry out any other work, allowing

them to concentrate on making a success of their business and

maximizing their returns up to and beyond the level of the minimum

income flaw. When it comes to the changes to the national living

minimum wage, that means that the competition, the pay of the

competitor to the self-employed will be going up. In relative terms, they

have an opportunity to increase their pay. The other thing that the

minimum income plot is to address a loophole in the system where

individuals can report little or zero income, and still receive full

financial support. That is neither desirable nor sustainable to

maintain. The amendment seeks to allow for flexibility. This power

already exists, and it provides significant -- detention for up to

12 months of claimants who are starting out and taking active steps

to increase their earnings. But the reporting allows universal credit to

be adjusted on the universal basis, to late ensure that people do not

have to wait several months for an increase in universal credit. We

have put in, following a report, they disregard for income on a

monthly basis. This approach eradicates the over and under

payment issue generated by the current system, which is done on

assumed average earnings. We need to make this work for particular

groups. One group is equity. We have regular meetings with equity to make

sure that we understand, and that we get there, and other concerns, but

the reality of the working lives of people with an equity right, and

adjusted to them. We are testing have to help and how to provide

support for the self-employed. Helping them move up, employing

specialised work, and we will test all of this out as we roll-out. The

noble Baroness is ahead of the game. The numbers who are self employed

under universal credit are low. We need to monitor how this works, and

the implementation of the income flaw works. As we roll-out universal

credit. Let me turn to a series of amendments about the annual report

on unemployment to include specific data on various different groups. I

must point out that we have not built into universal credit the

requirements to capture specific new management information associated

with these amendments under our current plans. Seeking to do so now

would not represent -- we have a relatively short timescale to report

this information. It could, more importantly, disrupt the universal

credit implementation timeline. Amendment 66, proposes to extend

reporting duty to include information about self-employed. The

UK Labour market is the most diverse -- one of the most diverse in the

world for self employment. We want to do all we can to and courage

entrepreneurs. The government has launched to reduce to see how we can

better support self-employment. There is a weekly allowance for the

first six months. This amendment would require the annual report and

progress toward unemployment to include Telmex include information

about the number of people self-employed. These figures are

published every month as part of the Labour market data. We do not feel

that we need to monitor, specifically, the particular share

of self-employed jobs. Turning to the other amendments, amendment 63,

that full employment -- I am sure that everyone in the chamber

understands exactly what he referred to stop. Full employment should mean

80% of the working age population. I blessed with pleasure when he

mentioned by peace in 2007 on reducing dependency. It set up the

challenges that the country needed to face. It was to be serious about

full employment. I did write about it, as he rightly says. In the

context of the Labour government's aspirations to achieve an 80% of

working age population. There has quite a lot changed in the 80%

figure stop The first thing to adjust is the awareness definition

of the population, that it has moved as a result of equalization

attention to 65 for both men and women. The 80% aspiration has moved

down to 78%. There is also another slightly less mechanical change, the

makeup of the population. Older people, and with young people

entering the Labour market later because of their participation in

education has been increasing. The affect of all of those I have

estimated. I had a feeling that the Noble Lord of my wanted very

detailed analysis. The effect of those changes puts the 80% figure

closer to 75%. The manifesto commitment uses the comparative to

be the highest employment rate of the big seven industrial companies.

Ironically, that would mean raising our implement rate to around 75%,

more or less the same figure. I am using the UK stated rates, not the

international comparison rates. It is moving from the 73.7%, to the

latest report is 75%, roughly a million people. That would represent

our highest implement rate. We are at our highest implement rate now.

The target also means that if the other competitive countries move up

further, that pulls our target up with it. On balance, I think that

achieving the target would put us pretty close to something as

challenging as what I was writing about way back in 2007. The first

part of amendment 67 would require a separate annual report on the

progress being made toward the disability employment gap. The

latter amendments would also require a number of specific information,

such as the employment rates of different groups of disabled people.

However, as progress against the disability gap amendments, a key

amendment -- the sentiments are not necessary, as that progress would be

reported in the annual report on full employment in any case. The

points on how we need to bring together the climate and health

social care to support disabled people is one that we accept. One of

the things that we are proposing which has been called the book for

-- called for, is a radical form -- reform of how we provided this

support. On the access to a work issue and

the spending review announced that reeled terms increase in fundings

for work. This would allow it to expand, sustainably, a response to

the query from the noble lady. Similar requests on amendment 64

about carers -- this government recognises the vital role that

carers provide. Many carers are also in work. The current family resorts

report shows that in 2013 and 2014 all carers were in some kind of

work. The OMS already publishes information on the number of people

outside of the ever market working at home. It would be difficult to

track all former carers who have returned to employment following the

end of their implements rule, because some will not claimant

benefits, and they will be able to move back into work with the help of

job centre plus. Those who start looking for work initially claimant

benefits can get access to a range of support to the job centre

network. Worked -- help can be tailored, and when they successfully

move into work, they don't have to tell job centre plus the reason for

their claim. Amendment number 64 a including information on the

self-employed. Her point on the some of the trends. She made the point

that self-employment makeup most of the employment growth for 2011. That

is a statistical quirk that happened because a number of employees fell

sharply in the recession as always does. All of the losses of employees

have been regained, and they are up by one half million since 2010. --

one and a half million. He is taking us through a series of reasons as to

why he cannot do the granularity in the report. It was his aspirations

to have a higher wage lower worker economy that benefits all. Unless

Parliament has some granularity for setting that progress, the

Chancellor is setting his own aspiration and his own system,

because what everybody agrees on is that there has a material change in

the nature of implement over the last ten years, which influences

what people can earn and how they can participate in the Labour force.

Aspiring to a local welfare government that benefits all, we

need to understand these trends, relating to people who are disabled,

self-employed, or who have contracts. The Lord seems to be

listing white these cannot be provided. I don't have to tell her

that a lot of these issues are quite contentious, and there is a lot of

analysis going on, some of which takes many years to complete end to

come to fruition. The problem is that this is a commitment that runs

to the rest of this particular government into 2020. To put in some

of the information requirements that some of these amendments are in

practice looking for, is expensive, risks delaying universal credit

because we are under a tight timetable. The primary interest is

to see us move with as much speed as we safely can. It would not provide

us with adequate information, given the amount of time that it takes to

get the into shape. I hope that I have clearly summarised why we are

not... There is not a horror at the prospect. We looked at it very

deeply, and we felt that we have have to use the information that is

available. The information that we are gathering to get this report to

work. I am not trying to argue universal credit, I can understand

some of the difficulties. At the very least, the government should

give us a report on the progress it is making, so that we can begin to

understand the kind of developments that are likely to happen, and the

successes that the Chancellor might have. The whole point of this Clause

is that we will put down a proposal of how we are intending to report

unemployment. A lot of the thoughts here, into the specific requests and

reasonings are pretty valuable to us as we develop how we can report best

about our progress towards full employment. Our latest figures show

40% of 16 to 20-year-olds, one of the lowest figures on record. It is

a constantly changing group, and many leave the Labour market for

short periods between jobs. It doesn't tell us in and of itself

about unemployment. On zero hours, which I almost thought I wouldn't

talk about, because we always have a little snippet each other about it,

it is only 2% of the market. We have outlawed exclusivity clauses in this

particular contracts. Part-time work, certainly over the last year,

has been driven by people choosing to work part-time, that in mind I

have been the case in the recession. It is a constantly changing group.

Some of the concerns expressed by the noble lady, I feel like I am

living in a parallel universe. The employment growth has been dominated

by a full-time employment employees. It has risen in all agreements --

regions since 2010. Wages are growing faster than inflation.

Temporary work in the UK is among the lowest. The trends are more

encouraging than they have been. Given these arguments, and that the

statistics on these issues are widely available, I don't believe

that specifying them to be in the report is necessary. I understand

that full employment is not just about a particular percentage of

working adults. We will, as I said, give further consideration as how

best this annual report to reflect the diversity of Labour. I apologise

for the length of my response. I urge noble Lords to withdraw their

amendment. I would like to thank him for his

response, obviously I will carefully read it. I would like to think him

for taking part in the debate. The point of this whole range of

amendments to this important part of the bill was to indicate that some

of us do not think that there is sufficient focus on those areas when

the issue of Social Security comes into consideration. These are not

add-ons, as the Noble Lord the Minister has said, sometimes we

think that we live in a parallel universe. It is not an issue of

popping up failing businesses. It is the question of some seasonal and

fluctuating businesses wanting consideration of their annual income

so that there our funds when they claim Social Security. The noble or

the Minister says there's some flexibility already that exist. I

have to say there is little of that apart from the announcement that

those in the first year business will be sent. Finally, I think it is

important to to know that the self-employed, of course the number

of universal credits... If you see an articulated one down the road --

Lori coming down the road, you probably have an idea that you may

get run over if you stay in the same place. What I am trying to say is

that the establishment of minimal will cause trouble in universal

credit in the future. I think it is a warning that is -- that should be

well heated. I will seek leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment 62,

not moved. Amendment 96 eight, not moved. Amendment 62 B. I want to

take the opportunity to seek verification on an issue that was

raised with me by a charity which represents parents and children with

life limiting and life-threatening conditions. It is a brief amendment,

but here is the issue, I understand that children under three are

knowledgeable for the higher mobility component of DNA, I think

that truck under three are generally not assume to be immobile. The

assumption is that under threes will have to be carried in arms lifted

into buggies and different cars and car thief, whether they have a

disability or not. For most social and their parents it is true. -- car

seats. There are small numbers of children that do need help and

should have access. As a small group of children who depend on

ventilated... Who have made one or more or other technologies which are

life-sustaining. Children are in effect constantly attached to life

sustaining equipment often bulky or heavy, the shot has to be based in a

wheelchair, capable of carrying the equipment. Parents need especially

adapt it or broad-based vehicles capable of caring these children

linked together with their not small appointment. The children cannot be

easily lifted out of cars like most children their age. Output of the

Minister the case why this small group of children need mobility and

now ends. Most of these children have to be placed in a medical

Wiltshire are bad because they need support. These are heavy items, in

addition to the life-sustaining equipment most of the children

acquire a variety of equipment to go with them, wherever they are. This

would include a spare ventilators come oxygen supply and mascot of

emergency kits. That is in addition to all of the things parents have to

carry as well. Buses will not take oxygen, with the inevitable risk of

infection... As well as many susceptible to infection, they are

prone to medical prices. The parents need to be able to get them to

hospitals quickly for life-saving treatment 24 seven. They do not have

a car and the children may not be assessed to have a safe living home.

As was heartbreaking for the family and children, it could cost more

from the highway mobility allowance of... What with this all cost? As a

result of the Reform Act in 2012 disability living allowance has been

replaced by people over the age of 16. They want open access to this

component, for under threes to require life-sustaining equipment.

There were nearly 49,000 people with life-threatening conditions. Only a

very small portion of them are under threes to require life-sustaining

equipment. To establish how many there may be, meeting this component

of DLA, shall I submitted a freedom of information request in 2014. To

ask how many parents of children under three had asked for a blue

badge because the child was dependent on heavy medical

appointment who needed to be near a vehicle in case there was an

emergency treatment. I found that in 1530 children needed patches. The

wording of this amendment is aligned to the criteria. If those figures

are correct, the cost of giving all 1530 children access to the higher

mobility rate will be about for ?5 million, that is a small sum for

them. It would transform the lives of the families of the child with

life-threatening or life limiting conditions. What I described seems

like an anomaly, I cannot believe they will allow this to happen. I

hope the Minister will give a careful response. I cannot see it

reason for no one... I hope the Minister grid I have made the case

that babies and children under three will depend on big and heavy

life-sustaining women to stay alive in or have a need for immediate

access to transport for medical reasons should be regarded as having

an additional mobility and become eligible for the mobility element of

DLA. Insert the New Clause printed on the list. Can I think the noble

or tabling this and providing this clarity. I must express my own

empathy regarding what this amendment aims to achieve. There can

be no doubt of the position of a family with young disabled children.

However I find myself in the usual position to reflect the position set

out by the Noble Lord some six years ago when he was a government

minister for work and pensions. On that occasion what was to become the

2009 welfare reform Act was being debated in Grant committee, and he

made a report that the bill introduced... A new provision which

now gives access to the higher rate mobility component of DLA to

severely, visually impaired people. In much the same terms, at least

intended as the amendment we are discussing today was introduced to

the Noble Lady baroness Thomas, on that occasion the Noble Lord Lord

Mackenzie was sympathetic for the situation. Ultimately he resisted

the motion. I quote him "In this difficult financial climate we need

to consider carefully the potential cost of such change. This amendment

would have caused an additional cost, the estimated cost was ?50

million a year. This'll be a significant increase in what is

unfortunately a difficult economic situation and is simply not

affordable in the current context. " I have never been sad her to have to

agree with the Noble Lord -- and to resist the motion. On the tech side,

the amendment... That is because the distinction between the two rates

has been lost. There are some unintended consequences of the

amendment, most notably removing entitlement of the 16 rows of 500

children -- 16,500 as a consequence of severe visual impairment. I think

that is just drafting and I would not want to dwell on that issue, we

can always work that out. The reason why there is the lower age, while

many children can walk by age three, not all will have done so the

promise of disability. And you would have been able to walk from eight

considerable distance. HB provides a reasonable boundary line to what may

be considered development of the lay and walking difficulties arising

from a disability or long-term health condition. I think we can all

agree that the majority of very young children, disabled or not,

will lead to considerable degree of support and help from parents and

care. Most parents will be will be carrying a bunch of equipment, I do

recognize that some young children with particular conditions may be

heavily reliant on additional equipment. Some that can be bulky

and heavy. But, such technologies are improving all the time. Some are

becoming lighter, smaller and more transportable. Despite it being

unavailable to children so young, there exist a range of provisions

which can help support children and their parents. The care component of

DLA, there is no restriction on how it can be used in any entitlement

can bring access. Hearings may also be a will to receive a blue badge,

for free parking at the child is on heavy equipment. That leads me to

questioning the provision of this amendment which focuses on children

who need to be near a vehicle for treatment or for that vehicle to at

least transfer for them with their equipment. The reason why question

this is because on the basis of that the provision can only help those

parents who have Artie had use of the motor vehicle who would gain

access to the higher rate mobility, as I said earlier the amendment is

not clear in its intent regarding the rate of children under three and

they will become entitled. It is not clear whether such children will be

turn a motor vehicle. Hence the turn a motor vehicle. Hence the

amendment is currently drafted and excludes families without access to

a vehicle. The second reason why question this is on a more practical

basis. If a child requires emergency transportation along with Bulkley on

medical appointment, it is doubtful that transportation by the parents

is a reasonable and practical expectation. Our emergency services

were much better equipped in terms of medical training in suitable

vehicles are in place for this type of situation. Finally, I must turn

to the finance part of it. This amendment goes further than that

debate, and the time available we have been unable to determine how

many children could potentially be entitled on this act. That would add

to and are ready significant cost burden and further damage our

capacity to stay within the welfare cap. I am sympathetic to the

intentions behind the amendment, but the government cannot accept this on

the basis of the offending cost implications. Regrettably, I have to

agree with the Noble Lord, Lord Mackenzie. I urge them to withdraw

this amendment. The Minister tell me how many children it is based on?

I thought I knew the answer to that. Inspiration is striking, I hope.

Sorry, it is 18,500, not 16,500. 18,500 under mysteries are in

receipt of DLA and 5500 children impacted. Sorry. I am grateful for

that, I am grateful on his thought to apply. I wonder when he goes back

and read he may like to reflect on whether given all that he tells us,

his view of the current economic situation how compares two or more

of Mackenzie was in office, might you might feel that his own

assessment may be different. I can see that the two are of one mind. I

would ask him to think very hard. Lord Mackenzie has put his name to

this motion is supportive of it today. I would wonder whether he

would like to be willing for his would like to be willing for his

department to meet someone from short lives, perhaps with me. I

think it would like to understand the basis of the argument he is made

in. -- making. I would appreciate meeting them, with the Noble Lady.

As I said, I do really regret what I have had to say. I agree to withdraw

the amendment. Amendment 62 C, not moved. Amendment 62 D from the

supplementary sheet, not moved. Amendment 63, not moved. Amending 64

not moved. The question is that cause one stands, as many of that

opinion will say content, the contrary not content. The contents

haven't. Amendment 65, not moved. Amendment 66, not moved. Amendment

67, not moved. Clause to amendment 68. I have had discussions with the

chief, I am not terribly happy about this evening as late as it is,

particularly there are a number of colleagues who are severely

disabled. They are spending a lot to late hours working on this bill. I

am prepared for us to proceed this group of amendments, I would hope

that this debate can be relatively short. I hope that colleagues will

see the sense that we should not be working this late in the sort of

legislation. In response to that remark is, I should say that the

order of consideration was in fact designed at the request of the

opposition so that those who were disc abled to participate in the

debates in the committee at the beginning of business. Disabled. I'd

commit today, we had other business, the truth of the matter is, at this

point we are still not at a point at which we are going to be starting a

business on the third day. Which is amendment 70 two. I do not think it

is unreasonable that this house has a tradition, it tries to deliver the

business. I understand and I need the support of the opposition in

doing that. I believe we should do one more amendment, one more group.

Which will take us past the normal hour for taxes. That is not unusual

in this house, given the unusual nature of the discussions that have

taken place in this bill, I think that is not an unreasonable thing to

ask. I hope the Noble Lord, my usual partner is fair to accept that is my

decision. We have not reached the conclusion of that target that we

set ourselves when we discussed this matter earlier today. My lords, I

will attempt to be sustained into the point given the time of day.

Nevertheless, this is an important amendment. Moving amendment 68, and

referring to the other two. I wanted to set the scene on this, the

purpose behind this amendment is to ensure that we do get a proper

report back from the government. Taking into account the various

aspects of apprenticeships as defined in the amendment. The

government is setting themselves a ambitious target of 3 million

apprenticeships during the life of this Parliament. The challenge will

be to ensure that they sustain quality as well as quantity. In a

recent report said that the expansion of apprenticeships has

quality programmes that fail to give quality programmes that fail to give

young people new skills or better chances at a job. According to the

chief inspector of schools, he achieved to some employees of

wasting public funds on low-quality schemes that undermine the

importance of operations. The recent Channel 4 programme... Poor quality

apprenticeships were particularly prevalent in retail, health care,

customer service and administration cording to the highly critical

report from offset. About 140,000 started apprenticeships in business

administration last year and 130,000 began health care apprenticeships.

Standards are much higher and the motor vehicle construction and

engineering industries, numbers were smaller. So far apprenticeships have

not... Smaller businesses are not being involved and there are not

advance schemes. Widespread concern has been expressed by business to

the introduction of the new training levy. Just also referring to the

other amendments, briefly. We are looking to ensure that accurate

reporting in the areas of disability, gender, etc. I think an

important point about the destination data for those

completing apprenticeships. I want to go to touch briefly on amendment

69, which just our attention these important situations in relation to

people with disabilities under the age of 25 seeking apprenticeships.

There are some worrying information there. We know apprenticeships or by

excellent route into work for young people disabled people. However too

often apprenticeships are inaccessible for it disabled people.

The number of disabled apprenticeships has declined from

11.5% and 2007-2008, to a .7% in 2014-2015. -- 8.7%. Would like to

see further commitments from the government to support more disabled

people to participate in a budget -- apprenticeships. When the Noble Lady

is was binding -- is responding, what steps is she taking to ensure

the quality of apprenticeships and preventing the exploitation of young

people recognizing the damage it can cost of the reputation of

apprenticeships and the waste of public fundss what step is the

government taking to ensure that all schools give career advice on

apprenticeships bearing in mind the need to encourage young men and

women in minority groups. Bearing in mind that only 5% of youngsters aged

16 currently go into an apprenticeship scheme. How is she

going to ensure that young people are made aware of their rights to

receive proper training and education in a safe working

environment? What steps are they expand the participation of small

and medium enterprises and apprenticeship schemes given that

only about 25% of them currently take on apprenticeships. Are there

any plans for the government to expand the use of group training

associations and also 18 days? Will be the nature and timetable for the

introduction of the new training levy I presume they'll be

accompanied by the Cintas two... -- ATA. Can she comment on the future

of the United Kingdom's school body? After target inserts the word as

printed. I'm delighted that the Noble Lord...

She intended to address the barriers faced by disabled people in... And

places of duty, can she identify the barriers placed on under 25 disabled

people? Can they set out examples of good practice by employees and what

are the... Apprenticeships provide a great opportunity for disabled

students wanting to regain and get vocational education. For many

disabled people this will be the first time they experienced

employment and education. My lords, apprenticeships introduced disabled

people to the world of work in a supportive learning environment,

much needed by young people who face additional barriers? In addition to

project are crucial for the governments commitment to... This is

a central part of the government. In 2014, disabled rates... It

demonstrated through case studies that apprenticeships provide

opportunities for young disabled people to secure training for

employment, such schemes also helped employers to become disability

confidence. Lashio also that this is -- I was referred to... Will they

encourage employers to remove the disabled barriers? I am sure that

the Noble Lord appreciates in awareness of education. We must also

have regular reviews to the process of existing barriers to prevent the

same people from accessing apprenticeship opportunities.

The requirement for nonspecific industry qualifications to access

apprenticeships is a great barrier. It created an exclusive

apprenticeship offer, he says" apprentices in LDD learning

difficulties and disabilities are often disadvantaged due to the fact

that these functional and other qualifications are assessed out of

context stop these does an apprentice working to the vocabulary

T associate with a particular job may find it is difficult. " there is

evidence that a significant number of disabled people especially with

learning disabilities are prevented and gaining apprenticeships

certificates because they have not passed certain requirements. They

could be easily replaced by successful completion of work

related requirements such as the relevant industry accepted

vocational qualifications. The national voice for lifelong

learning, who have been working with the government while apprenticeship

placement said" some owners are more than capable of achieving the

competence and knowledge based elements of an apprenticeship, but

due to their learning difficulty are unable to achieve English and math

at the required standard". Until there is a relaxing of this role,

disabled learners will continue to be disadvantaged in work and

training. In evidence submitted by the alliance for inclusive education

on the Equality Act in disability gave an example of a college

reluctant to allow students on the course because of the functional

skills aspect. This seems to be discriminatory against students with

LDD especially one who was working on a level two standard in this

vocational subject. I believe such artificial barriers kill industries

and they miss out on talented and they stigmatize certain groups of

disabled people as unemployable. I was captivated by a TV series

recently. A group of disabled people were recruited into an

apprenticeship programme. At the end of the apprenticeships, four of the

candidates entered the world of work, the programme did not in any

way try to be something it was not. Of the experience it was that it was

not perfect, and that is the thing. They were given the chance. And they

were treated just like they were treated any other apprentices, it

worked. It was a privilege to work with these guys. It shows the

possibility of disabled people in the hospitality industry. Disabled

people have so much potential. Most of the candidates did not have GCS

English level grades. Apprenticeship routes provide great opportunities

of enabling more disabled old. This aim can only be achieved by having

the appropriate information.