09/01/2017 House of Commons

Download Subtitles




Live coverage of the day's proceedings in the House of Commons including an urgent question on domestic violence cases and a statement on mental health and NHS performance.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 09/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



system that provides security and dignity in old age. Order. Urgent


question, Mr Peter Kyle. I would like to ask the Secretary of State


for Justice to make a statement on the emergency review to determine


how to ban perpetrators of domestic violence from directly


cross-examining their victims within the family court? Mr Speaker, can I


start by saying how grateful I am to the honourable member for the chance


to update the House of what is an important issue. To put this in


context, the issues at stake in family proceedings are always


sensitive and often complex. The decisions of the court can have far


reaching implications for the individuals concerned. The presence


of domestic abuse only exacerbate an already traumatic situation. The


government has taken steps to make sure victims in the family justice


system have support and protection. Protected legal aid for individuals


seeking protection from abusers. We continue to invest in the court


estate to improve the physical security of family courts and the


emotional support available for users. We have placed particular


emphasis on training for those who work in the family justice system,


making sure they understand the nature and impact of domestic abuse


and they act appropriately when they come across it. We know there is


more to do. As my colleague, the Minister for victims, made clear


when this was debated in Parliament on the 15th of September, the


government is determined to improve the family justice response to


domestic abuse and we have been working closely with judges and


others to consider what additional protection may be necessary. We are


particularly concerned about the fact that unrepresented, alleged


perpetrators can cross examine their alleged victims in family


proceedings. I want to make family court processes safer for victims so


they can advocate effectively for themselves and for the safety of


their children. This cannot happen while a significant number of


domestic abuse victims face cross-examination by their abusers.


The Lord Chancellor has requested urgent advice on how to put an end


to this practice. This sort of cross examination is illegal in the


criminal courts and I am determined to see it banned in family courts


also. We are considering the most comprehensive and efficient way of


making that happen. That will help family courts to concentrate on the


key concerns for the family and always put the children's interests


first, which is what they are supposed to do. This work, which is


being fast tracked within the Department, is looking in particular


at the provisions in the criminal law which presents alleged


perpetrators from cross-examining their alleged victims in criminal


proceedings, and we are considering how we might apply similar


provisions in the slightly different circumstances of family proceedings.


Members will appreciate such a proposal does require thought, but


we want to resolve it as soon as possible. We will be making further


details available shortly once the work is complete. I would like to


thank the president of the family division who has argued passionately


that this practice should be outlawed for good. This is an issue


that has been wreaking untold devastation on victims of domestic


violence. I have spoken to numerous survivors of abuse his accounts of


torment under cross-examination, often by convicted rapist in the


family Court, are devastating to hear but impossible for most of us


to imagine. I have spoken to woman who was cross-examined by a man who


was in jail for numerous counts of rape and abuse that left her


unconscious and hospitalised. As a result of the family court process,


this vulnerable woman needed weeks of medication and months of


counselling to recover. She has now suffered this ordeal three times. I


have spoken to the sister of a woman who was abuse egregiously it


resulted in her death. The convicted murderer then sued the custody of


their child from prison where he was serving a life sentence for murder.


He directly cross-examined the sister of the woman he murdered.


Even having the grotesque nerve to ask, what makes you think you can be


a parent to my child? Abuse is being continued, perpetuated right under


the noses of judges and police. The very institutions that should be


protecting the vulnerable with every sinew of state power. On September


the 15th last year in response to speeches from members from both


sides of the House, the Parliamentary under Secretary of


State for Justice said this was a scourge which blights our society.


Yet he made no commitment to review or to change policy. Sadly, it took


the excellent coverage of the Guardian over the Christmas break


for that to emerge from the Justice Department. However, the source was


anonymous. Can the Minister give clarity in the following areas...


Lord Justice Mumby, the president of the family court division supports


members to outlaw the cross-examination of victims by


perpetrators. He said this would require primary legislation. Does


the Minister agree with this assessment? If so, would he


prioritise the drafting and the deduction of any such legislation as


a priority? The anonymous source told the Guardian, this was a matter


of urgency for the Secretary of State. Can he tell the House, when


this review was started, and more importantly, when it will be


completed? Victims of abuse need to have precision and clarity at this


moment of great importance for them. Speed is of the essence, but so is


consultation. We need to get this right. Can the Minister tell us what


process is underway to enable victims and campaigners and support


organisations to feeding their essential experiences and views in


order that this review will at all times, be carried out with and not


done too, survivors of domestic abuse. And finally, as I told the


House back in September, it is a source of shame to me personally, I


got the age I am today without being aware such barbarism is being


practised within our own legal system. In addition to my lack of


inquisitiveness, which I regret profoundly, the secrecy imposed by


law on the family court process allowed this to continue without


journalistic oversight. Will he consider longer term assessment of


the wider operational activity of the family court system? This should


look in a considered and detailed way of the overall operation of the


family courts with a view to making sure, where appropriate, the greater


transparency and oversight of the family court process is introduced?


Order. Just before we proceed, let me just say this, the honourable


gentleman has raised an extremely serious matter and he has done so on


the back of considerable knowledge and research. He has aired the issue


in this House with great sensitivity. I did not wish to


interrupting, not least for that obvious reason. But perhaps I can


announce to the House New Year's resolution and that is, we must,


from now on, we must, without fail, stick to the established time limits


for urgent questions. The honourable gentleman was notified of the two


minute limit and he took over three minutes. The second point, the brief


this preamble of description is fine, but an urgent question is


supposed to be that, not a speech, not a contribution to debate, but a


series of questions. I know the honourable gentleman well and I know


he will not take offence because he has raised important matters, but in


future it must be done in accordance with the proper form and to time.


The Minister of April. Can I start by agreeing with the


honourable gentleman on many of the points he has made. Judges have


always had discretion to try to get to the truth of the matter and to


protect families and so on and judges have discretion to ask


questions themselves to avoid situations arising which are against


the interests of justice. But over recent years the judges have come


more concerned about situations, as the honourable gentleman has said,


where the abuse is being perpetrated through the proceedings and that is


why Sir James Mumby has spoken out and why the department is treating


this as something that should be dealt with as a matter of urgency.


Is it necessary to change the law? The answer is it is. In order to ban


cross-examination it would be necessary for primary legislation


and there are ancillary matters relating to this which would require


legislation. Is work being done? Yes, it is being done at great pains


to ensure that all these matters are dealt with in a comprehensive and


effective way and so the urgency is there. This is something I became


the minister dealing with these matters in October. I chaired the


family Justice board and we have become very concerned over that


period about this issue and the Lord Chancellor shares that concern,


which is why we are moving at speed to try and tackle this. The extent


to which consultation is necessary is something I will consider in the


light of the honourable gentleman's comments and will discuss it with


him in private. But it is pretty straightforward what is required, a


band and then the ancillary measures which are necessary to allow


cross-examination without the perpetrator doing it. The extent to


which a wide consultation is needed I will question. Finally, in terms


of transparency in the cause, journalists are now able to attend


court and report proceedings but there are obvious restrictions to


protect children and the like. The Minister is to be congratulated on


moving promptly on this matter and the family division is to be


congratulated. Would my right honourable friend accept the simple


solution would be probably to adopt the criminal procedures under the


1991 legislation lock stock and barrel and use the format to put


that into primary lock and accept the very modest public expenditure


of a court appointed to do the cross-examination where justice


requires would be a drop in the ocean compared to the benefits and


the interest of justice to individuals who are victims of


abuse? I am very grateful to the chairman of the Select Committee for


those comments. I agree with a good deal of it. There are some


differences from criminal proceedings. For example in a case


where an injunction is being sought whether it is not a criminal charge


or a case where perhaps money is being considered, but there is a


background of abuse. In fact for legal aid in cases of domestic abuse


that is a wider list than is available in terms of criminal


proceedings, but the basic point he makes is right. As to the bill, I am


not able to give a commitment on that, it would depend on how quickly


the work was concluded and that is something I am working on very fast.


I thank the honourable member for hope for asking this urgent question


and that the Minister for asking this response. This issue really


unite the House. Questioning victims in court has been repeatedly raised


in this house and in the media. Many members on both sides of the House


have constituents who have been left devastated by the experience so that


the government is doing something to no end this practice is welcome. But


this is a clear admission that the legal aid cuts have caused this


situation. Victims of domestic violence struggled to provide


evidence of their abuse because frequently they are not believed. In


some cases medical evidence is difficult to obtain and their


experience is made worse still because the abuser is also unable to


get representation and is allowed to question them. Even in a situation


where they are prevented from contacting that situation and so the


abuse continues. But it need not be that way. In the criminal cause the


cross-examination of a member accused of domestic violence is not


allowed. Is the Ministry counting the numbers of litigants in person


in the family courts? How many of those are victims of domestic


violence? How many are convicted or alleged to have committed domestic


violence? Will the Minister look to the practice in criminal cause and


alongside prohibiting cross examination introduce greater use of


more sensitive procedures? When will the review finally begin? At the


honourable lady knows on her final point the review has to be concluded


by the 18th of April, sorry by April, 2018, so it is not overdue


yet, but it is something the government has very much in mind and


which we will have to start fairly shortly. In terms of the other


points, legal aid is available in cases of domestic abuse, that is why


the government concentrated its efforts in legal aid on areas where


people's lives liberties were at stake and in areas such as domestic


abuse and housing were homes were at risk, so that is not an issue. But I


accept the evidence criteria are important and that is why the


government has allowed a longer period and a wider range of evidence


to be used for that. I think that is something that has been welcome.


Cross-examination by litigants in person takes place too much and she


asked what the exact number is. It is not clear, but it is a


considerable number, which is why the government considers this to be


an important issue to tackle. Can I congratulate my honourable friend


and welcome everything he says about the government's attitude to this


long-standing problem. Could I urge him to look at the rules in relation


to legal aid because there is strong anecdotal evidence from former


colleagues of mine at the family bar and a judiciary that there is a


direct consequence and link between the rise in litigants in person and


the changes to legal aid actually begun under the last Labour


government and it is this link between litigants in person that is


causing so many of these problems and would he at least look at it and


it may provide some of the solutions. As my honourable friend


has rightly said, this is a long-standing issue, but it is one


which has become particularly urgent and where the cries for help from


the judges and others have become more urgent and that is why the


government is tackling this issue. As regards litigants in person, it


is necessary to find a way of stopping them using proceedings to


continue the abuse. That is what we are aiming to do. May I welcome the


Justice Secretary's emergency review and stress how important it is that


we all focus across the UK on how to prevent the perpetrators of domestic


abuse from using the processes of the justice system. In Scotland the


government is engaged in a significant overhaul of the justice


system ahead of the introduction of new legislation to introduce an all


encompassing offence of domestic abuse to include all forms of


coercive behaviour. In Scotland legal aid is widely available in


both criminal and civil cases. In England and Wales are cuts to legal


aid mean 80% of family cases seek at least one party without a lawyer and


60% of cases in the family courts and neither partner has a lawyer.


Victims of domestic abuse can only access legal aid if they cross a


threshold test which has already been found to be too restrictive in


the judicial review case. What we really need in addition to this


review is a review of the criteria for access to legal aid for victims


and survivors of domestic abuse. When will the government commit to


that sort of review? The honourable and learned lady segued into a


question just in time! I thank the honourable lady for that and for her


news from Scotland. In terms of legal aid in England and Wales it


was deliberately decided by my right honourable friend to concentrate the


effort on the cases where people's' life, liberty and their homes or


where there have been domestic abuses. Give it was a period of


austerity and decisions had to be made, he got that judgment right. In


terms of the criteria for legal aid and the evidence that needs to be


provided, it is not as though the government has said it is set in


stone. When criticisms have been made we have changed the rules to


make a system which tackles those criticisms. My overall point would


be that the government is responding when it should. Can I welcome a


right honourable friend's announcements today and the work he


is doing with the Lord Chancellor. But can I also draw his attention to


a report published in April of this year which I published with my


honourable friend the member for Birmingham Yardley, which not only


picked upon this issue of cross examination, but look at the issues


of special measures in court to make sure it is easier for some of the


most vulnerable victims to give their evidence so they do not feel


intimidated in that process? Can I pay tribute to my right honourable


friend's work in this area which is important. I know the government and


the ministerial committee that looks and violence against women and girls


takes a particular note of it. As regards special measures, the family


courts have always had a wider set of tools available to them than the


criminal cause and the judges have a wide discretion. Measures such as


taking cross-examination on a video basis, the section 28 in the


criminal courts, you can do that in family cases. You can take evidence


in a wide variety of ways, so there is a lot of protection there. We are


going further with this and so measures to deal with the court,


like ensuring there are separate waiting rooms, screens and those


sorts of physical aspects, they are being covered. So is the training of


the staff which is very important as well. I want to thank the Minister


for highlighting the discretion already available. Could he say what


steps he is taking now to remind the judiciary of the discretion that


they have and how they can apply it? The honourable lady makes an


important point and there are practice directions in the family


division and one is being prepared at the moment and so I will make


sure her comments are taken well on board in that direction, although we


do not make the practice directions, but we can pass that on. I have been


struck in my constituency surgeon sees surgeries, and one of my


constituents complaining about this was a former police officer. Can I


urge the Minister to use every tool possible to get this matter resolved


as soon as possible? We have all had examples and I am glad my honourable


friend was able to get that on the record. We have all had examples of


cases were in a way and abuse has occurred in the court. That is


something that is unconscionable and needs to stop and we need to tackle


this very urgently. The question of who should be


involved and consulted in this review, will the Minister Bear in


mind party litigants cross-examining their victims is actually just one


species of the controlling behaviour that lies at the heart of domestic


abuse. It is for that reason there is a real and important role for


organisations such as women's aid to have their voices heard in this


process? The honourable gentleman makes an important point and of


course the department does listen to what is said. The only point I make


is this is a discrete issue. It is an issue about banning


cross-examination by alleged perpetrators and making arrangements


to ensure cross-examination can take place in a suitable way. I wouldn't


want to sacrifice speed in tackling that for anything. Last week the


country were shocked and saddened by the death of my constituent, Gill


savoured, who campaigned for victims of sexual violence. She was


instrumental in changing the law which stopped rapist cross-examining


victims. Will my right honourable friend join me in paying tribute to


Jill, expressing our sincere condolences to her family does he


agree it is absolutely right the law is extended to the victims of


domestic violence? I certainly think it is important to pay


tribute to Jill Saward and she was someone who showed to the rest of


her life what a wonderful person she was. Campaigning and doing charity


work. She was a model and someone who was the example of good. I would


like to pass the law which applies in criminal cases on into family so


we can tackle the abuse described. I declare my interest as a member of


Wilberforce chambers in Hull, although not currently practising. I


welcome the Justice Secretary's position to bring forward a review


of this issue. It clearly is an issue. But the Minister will no that


this was created as a result of the legal aid sentencing and punishment


of offenders act in 2012, because the truth is this, the very vast of


what people now are refused legal representation in family


proceedings, unless they can prove domestic violence, which is


virtually impossible to prove. So maybe the government should be


bringing forward a review, it isn't working, do something about it. I


don't agree with him, but can I just say there will be a review, it is


something we have promised. The date by which it has to be completed is


in April 2018 and three are committed to doing that. In terms of


the family proceedings, I think it is right that in many cases families


can come together and reach agreements and we don't have the


problem he outlined. But in some cases, and there are a significant


number of individuals where abuse is present. In those cases, it is


important the individual who is the victim shouldn't be cross examined


by the alleged perpetrator and that is what we want to solve. Earlier we


heard a cherry, now we can hear a Berry. Mr Jake Berry. Thank you Mr


Speaker. Can I congratulate the Minister as to the taking this on.


In his statement he has referred this as urgent. Will he commit when


this review is complete, to bring this through as emergency


legislation? I think it would forward support from all sides of


the House and we could do with this legislation in one day in ensuring


this could be changed as quickly as possible. Can I save the importance


of this is accepted across the House. Whether it is the appropriate


way of dealing with it or not, one thing is clear it should be dealt


with as a matter of urgency and that is what I am committed to do. They


should have said in the case of the point Laspo. On several occasions,


the Minister has said he's dealing with it urgently. When will we the


result? Of course the answer you get from the dispatch box is shortly,


which is what I have said, but that doesn't mean shortly. The


government's reforms around the family courts were designed to keep


some of these antagonistic cases out of court altogether but the changes


to legal aid had met there are more litigants in person in these very


sensitive cases. Does he acknowledge the being caused by litigants in


person on court resources, spinning out the times cases often take with


constant advice legal procedures needed by the judge himself. We need


to do something about this because it is messing up the family courts.


I do accept how litigants are helped with court proceedings is important


and the government spending ?3.5 million helping them. The point I


make, it is not every case that needs to be decided in court and I


am a strong supporter of mediation. I would like to see more of that.


This is a welcome review, but cross-examination is not the only


way which perpetrators exploit family core processors to perpetuate


their abuse. Can I ask the Minister if the emergency review will look at


the other ways in which abusers can, string out judicial process in the


family courts to continue abusing former partners and their children?


I will be happy to discuss the issue with the honourable lady and


certainly in due course about the matter. But, this is a discrete


area. It is an important one and I would like to see it tackle swiftly.


I am not looking to widen what we are doing at the moment. I want to


get on with this. Women's Aid have raised this issue and a number of


occasions, including most recently where they found 25% of women they


interviewed had been cross-examined on including one woman who had been


raped, beaten and abused over six years, had been cross-examined for


three hours. Notwithstanding the need to get it right, can I ask my


honourable friend, when he does get it right in terms of review, we move


to bring legislation as soon as possible to make sure this can never


happen again? My honourable friend highlights an important case. He


highlights the work of Women's Aid and I think he is right to say this


is a matter that needs to be tackled urgently. The need for training of


the judiciary goes beyond the family Court. I constituent of mine came to


see me because her ex-partner talk a case in the civil courts about the


management of family property. The judge said it was irrelevant that he


was in prison for raping her daughter. This cannot be right, they


need to be trained as well. Of course, that would not have been a


family Justice case, it would have been a civil case. I agree with the


honourable lady, that is also an important consideration. It is


something I will look into. I very much welcome what the Minister has


said today in his commitment to legislate. But in the meantime will


he ensure the best possible support is in place to support these very


vulnerable people, these victims, before, during and after these


proceedings? Yes, as I mentioned in my response to the urgent question,


a lot of effort has gone into training both court staff and others


to provide emotional support that is needed. While I think we all welcome


the tone of what the Minister has said today, this is supposed to be


an urgent review. Many women are going through these cases right now


so can we have some clarity that at least by Easter this review will be


concluded and we will look to see improvements in our courts? Yes, I


agree with that. I welcome the tone of the Minister's remarks. Will he


agree with me the point about legal aid misses the fact some of these


perpetrators are using the ability to cross examined as a tactic in the


courts, motivating what they are doing and it is more important is


plugged in the law is made to stop this practice from continuing? What


is being put forward by a number of colleagues and my honourable friend


has made the same point, it is a form of abuse in itself to be cross


examining the victim in these circumstances. I agree with that,


which is why we are keen to conclude this review on a short timetable, as


I said to the honourable lady. I am grateful to the Minister for the


terms in which he has replied to the urgent question. He has talked about


the urgency of this issue. He has accepted the words of the chairman,


the president of the family court that primary legislation would be


needed. What commitment can he give to those survivors of domestic


violence and abuse that change will be brought forward urgently? I can


make the assurances I have made, we are tackling this as a matter of


urgency. There is a busy legislative timetable with all sorts of matters


to do with Europe and the like and we will have to see what can be


achieved in terms of the legislative timetable, but I want to tackle this


urgently. On behalf of of my constituent, Claire, whose children


were murdered by her ex-husband, I welcome this review. But in the


debate in September which I co-sponsored, the minister at his


side made a clear commitment to overhauling the culture of the


family courts, and in particular our review our practice direction 12. Is


the government still committed to the broader set of changes we so


urgently need to see? Can I just beat to the to the work the


honourable lady has done on this issue. The family justice board


which I'd share with another minister, the honourable member for


Crewe and Nantwich. We are committed to improving the overall in which


way the courts work and we are in the process of having a new practice


direction in the area of victims. But it is certainly a point we are


very much alive too. Everyone who has spoken today has said how urgent


the situation is, including the minister himself. In view of this


and in view of the fact he has said primary legislation will be needed,


is there any reason why he could not present this in three or four


months? As I have said to her colleague, we are keen to complete


this review as a matter of urgency. Legislative programme is a complex


matter at the moment, for reasons which I have already hinted that so


we will have to see what is possible. But we would like to


tackle it urgently. The questions has been on domestic violence, but


can he confirm he is also seeking to implement this protection for


victims of emotional, financial control and other forms of


nonviolence abuse, which the government has, to its great credit,


sought to criminalise in recent months? As he will know, there is a


cross governmental approach to abuse which has its own definitions and so


on. If he looks at the areas covered for abuse when it comes to


applications for legal aid, he will see it is far wider than just


physical violence, it includes sex abuse cases and the like. We are


well alive to the need to cover a wider area than simply violence.


Whilst I appreciate the urgency and scope of the investigation, can he


give consideration to cases where the DWP are sharing the victims of


domestic abuse's information with the perpetrators of the crime when


making their decisions about benefits claims and giving, in the


case of my constituent, her anonymity being taken away from her


and it was passed on by the DWP? I am sure the honourable lady is


making an important point. If she wanted to write to me speak to me


about it I would be happy to look at it. But it is not what we are doing


in this particular exercise by looking at the cross-examination of


alleged perpetrators, it is a discreet, narrow area which we are


tackling and we wanted tackle urgently. It is a different matter,


but her point is important. Survivors of domestic abuse tell us


they feel read Victor Mize and re-traumatised by their experience


in the family Court. Could the minister give us more clarity on how


the voices and views of survivors of domestic abuse will be considered in


this emergency review? Well, my view of this is that it is


now though issued to ban perpetrators, or alleged


perpetrators from cross examining victims. I think this is something


we all agree on. The sort of arrangement that there need to be


put in place to tackle the issue of cross-examination are things that


are being tried in the criminal courts. If she has any particular


ideas or concerns about that I would obviously be happy to discuss it


with her, but I don't think it is a complicated matter, but a simple one


that needs urgent action. Thank you, whilst I'm aware that this debate


focuses on the adult victims of domestic abuse, research shows that


an estimated hundred and 30,000 children in the UK live in


households with high risk of domestic abuse where there is a


significant risk of harm or death and thousands more live with other


levels of domestic abuse every single day. Can the Minister please


clarify that as recommended by Women's Aid, there must not be an


assumption of shared parenting in cases where domestic abuse is a


feature? Well, I mean it is an important point and clearly the


courts are very alive to this, but I think we do have to give some


discretion, because the family cases are very wide and have the range of


factors in them. I think the judges do a good job and I would just like


to put on record that these aren't easy cases and judges do have to


have an area of discretion. Although she makes a good point I would like


to insure that remains the case. Thank you. Constituent came to meet


extremely distressed she was having her husband repeatably take a back


to the family court over access issues, so not only was she having


the cross-examination she was also being driven into poverty by having


to fund her own defence and her own case. Will the Minister also look at


how courts can look at fixation is, repeated requests over access which


are actually behind a lot of this POS of behaviour? -- a lot of this


coercive behaviour. I think she makes a very important point, I am


more than happy to raise this in the family Justice board and to look at


it, but it's not part of the important work we're doing at the


moment to try and do something urgently the issue of


cross-examination. It is appointed that bears on it but it is not the


absolute focus on what we're doing at the moment. But it is and we will


look forward to -- we will look into. Statement the Secretary of


State secretary Jeremy Hunt. With the mission I would like to


make a statement about mental health and NHS performance. This government


is committed to a shared society in which public services work to the


highest standards for everyone. This includes plans announced by the


Prime Minister this morning and mental health. I am proud that under


this government 1400 more people are accessing mental health services


every day compared to 2010. We are investing more in mental health than


ever before, with plans for a million more people with mental


health conditions to access services by 2020. But, we


recognise there is more to do and so we will proceed with plans to


further improve mental health provision including formally


accepting the recommendations of the independent task force on mental


health which will see mental health spending increase by ?1 billion a


year by the end of parliament. A green paper on children and young


People's mental health to be published by the end of the year,


enabling every secondary school to train someone in mental health first


aid. A new partnership with employers to support mental health


in the workplace, at ?250 million extra invested in places of safety


for those in crisis following the highly successful start to this


programme in the last Parliament. An ambitious expansion of digital


mental health provision and an updated and more comprehensive


suicide prevention strategy, further details of these plans are contained


in the written ministerial statement. However, telling the


winter, as are most precious public surface the NHS has been under


sustained pressure for a number of years. In just six years the number


of people over 80 has risen by 340,000. And life expectancy has


risen by 12 months. As a result demand is unprecedented. The Tuesday


after Christmas was the busiest day in the history of the NHS. Some


hospitals are reporting that Amy attendances are up to 30% higher


compared to last year. -- A attendances. I therefore hope to set


out how we intend to sustain it for the future. First I would like to


pay tribute to staff on the front line. 1.3 million NHS staff,


alongside another 1.4 million in the social care system, do an incredible


job which is frankly humbling for all abuzz in this House. An


estimated hundred and 50,000 medical staff and many non-medical staff


worked on Christmas Day and New Year's Day, they have never worked


harder to keep patients save and whole countries in their debt. With


respect to this winter, the NHS has made more extensive preparations


than ever before. We started the run-up to the winter period with


over 600 more doctors and 3000 more nurses. Then just a year ago.


Bringing the total increase since 2010 to 11,400 more doctors, and


11,200 more hospital nurses. The NHS allocated ?400 million to local


health systems for winter preparedness, it is nationally


assured the winter plans of every trust, it launched the largest ever


flu vaccination programme with over 30 million people already


vaccinated, it also bolsters support outside a unease with 12,000


additional GP sessions -- A The result has been that this winter has


already seen days where a unease have treated an extra number of


people within four hours. -- a record number of people. As head of


NHS providers said, "Although there have been serious problems at some


trust, the system as a whole is doing slightly better than last


year." However, there are indeed a number of trusts where the situation


has been extremely fragile, all of last week's a neat guy that happened


at 19 trusts of which four are in special measurements. The most


recent stats show that three quarters of the folly weight


occurred in three trusts. In Worcestershire there has been a


number of unexpectedly long trolley waits. We are also aware of ongoing


problems in North Midlands with extremely high numbers of 12 hour


trolley waits. Nationally the NHS has taken urgent action to... As of


this week and there are some signs that that pressure is using both in


the most distressed trusts and across the system. However, with a


further cold weather and the way a spike in respiratory infections and


a rise in blue will bring further challenges ahead. So, NHS England


and NHS improvements will also consider further measures which May


be taken in particularly distressed systems on a temporary basis at the


discretion of local clinical leaders. They may include temporary


release in time for GPs to support urgent care word, clinically


triaging non-urgent calls to the Ambulance Service before they are


taken to hospital, continuing to suspend collective care including


where appropriate suspension of non-urgent outpatient appointing is,


working on rapid reinspection when this has potential to reopen at


capacity, working with community trusts and community nursing teams


to speed up discharge. Taking together these actions will give the


NHS the flexibility to take further measures as and when appropriate at


a local level. However, looking to the future, it is clear we need have


an honest discussion with the public about the purpose of A


departments, there is nowhere outside the UK that commits to all


patients that we will also out any health need within four hours, only


four other countries New Zealand, Sweden, Australia and have similar


national standards which are generally less stringent than ours.


This government is committed to maintaining and delivering that


vital for our commitment to patients, but since it was announced


in 2000 there are nearly 9 million more visits to our a unease, up to


30% of whom NHS England estimates do not need to be there and the tide is


continuing to rise. So, if we are continuing to respect this for our


standard we to be clear it is for urgent health problems not all


health problems however minor. As the NHS England's medical director


for acute care has said, "No country in the world has a standard for all


health problems however small, and if we are to protect services for


the most honourable neither can we." So we will continue to explore ways


to ensure that at least some of the patients who do not need to be in


A This way we will be able to improve the patient experience for


those with more minor conditions who are currently not seen within four


hours as well as protect the four hour promised for those who actually


need it. Mr Speaker, taken together what I have announced today are


plans to support the NHS in a difficult period, but also plans for


a government that is ambitious for our NHS, quite simply to offer the


safest, highest quality care available anywhere for both mental


and physical health. But they will take time to come to fruition and in


the meantime all our thoughts are with NHS and social care staff who


were working extremely hard over the winter and throughout the year both


inside and outside our hospitals and I commend the statement of the


House. I'm grateful to the Secretary of State for advance copy of his


statement and I begin by playing tribute to all the NHS staff who are


working day in day out to provide the highest possible care to


patients at the Spivey period. Of course, we welcome measures to


improve mental health services. -- this busy period. We welcome and


such announcements 12 months ago when the then Prime Minister made


these announcements. But do you not agree that if you want to shine a


light on mental health position you should aim had taught and... A


reduction in mental health head, 400 fewer doctors working in mental


health and perhaps most disgracefully of all the raiding of


children's local mental health budgets in order to plug funding


gaps in the widening NHS. Why were you unable to compare that the money


the mental health would be ring fenced? We would welcome support on


measures to improve mental health in schools, would the government offer


more resources to local authority psychologists, and what provision


would be in place to give teachers suitable training? Tending to the


winter crisis, this morning the Secretary of State said that things


have only been, "Falling over in a couple of places." Let's look at the


facts, a third of hospitals declared last month they needed help to deal


with patients coming through the doors, 15 hospitals ran out of bed


in one day in December, several hospitals have warned they can't


offer comprehensive care, elderly patients have been left languishing


on hospital trolleys in corridors sometimes but over 24-hour 's and he


says care is only falling over in eight couple of places. I know Lala


land did well at the globes last night, I didn't realise the


Secretary of State was living there, perhaps that's where he was all


weekend. Can he confirm that the NHS is facing a winter crisis and the


blame for this lies at the door of number ten Downing St? Does the


Secretary of State agree it was an error to ignore the pleas for extra


funds for social care in the Autumn Statement? Willy now bring forward


extra money allocated the social care's and Willie edge the


Chancellor and the Prime Minister... And with respect to the four hour a


any target he has just announced can repressive however, is he now really


telling patients that rather then trying to hit back for our target,


the government is now free writing and down grading it? If so, does NHS


England support this move and what guidance has he taken from the Royal


College of emergency medicine is that this is an appropriate change?


This Secretary of State has made patient safety a priority in that he


has our support, will he agree that one of the most upsetting reports to


come out of hospitals last week was the death of two patients at


Worcestershire wall and hospital trolleys. Can I ask the Secretary of


State whether he will lead an enquiry into these deaths? Does he


know whether these were isolated incidences and when does the trust


it intend to report back and will he undertake to keep the House updated


on these matters? In conclusion, there is no doubt that this current


crisis could have been averted, hospital bottoms, council leaders,


patient groups, MPs, urged the council to give the NHS and social


care extra money in the Autumn Statement, those requests fell on


deaf ears and we are now seeing the dismal consequences. NHS staff


deserve better, patients deserve better, the government needs to do


better can I I am happy to respond to his


comments and the Commons of all on rebel members. But I say this about


the tone of what he said. He speaks as if the NHS never had any problems


over the winter when Labour was in power. Let me say to him very


simply, the one thing NHS staff don't want right now is for any


party to start weaponised in the NHS for party political purposes. Let me


remind him when his party runs the NHS, double the number of people are


on waiting lists for treatment, people wait twice as long to have


their hips replaced. Whatever the problems are in the NHS, Labour is


not the solution. He talked about mental health. Let me tell him what


is happening on mental health. Thanks to the efforts of this


government and the Conservative led coalition, we have some of the


highest dementia diagnosis rates in the world. Talking therapies


programme, which is one of the most popular programmes for the treatment


of depression and anxiety, is treating 750,000 more people every


year and is being copied by people in Sweden. We are treating, every


day, 1400 more people for mental health conditions. We have record


numbers of psychiatrist. He mentioned mental health nurses, we


are training 8000 more, 22% increase. This is backed up by what


we are confirming today, which hasn't been done before, the


government is accepting the report of the independent task force review


led by the Chief Executive of Mind which commits us to spending ?1


billion more on mental health by the end of this Parliament. That would


not be possible with the spending commitments Labour was prepared to


make NHS in the last Parliament. It is because of this government's


funding we can make this commitment on mental health. Now, he talked


about the NHS and he gave completely the wrong impression of what I said


this morning. I was completely clear that all NHS hospitals are operating


under greater pressure than they have ever operated under. But, he


should perhaps listen to independent voices like Chris Hobson, no friend


of the government when it comes to NHS policy, who is very clear that


in the vast majority of trusts, people are coping slightly better


but we have serious problems in a few trusts, including Worcestershire


and a number of others. I can commit to him we will follow closely, the


reports and investigations into the two reported deaths at


Worcestershire and keep the House updated. He talked about social


care, social care last year 's spending went up by around ?600


million. He stood on a platform at the last election of not a penny


more to local authorities for social care. Not a penny more. To stand


here as a defender of social care is frankly an insult to vulnerable


people up and down the people, but particularly people living under


Labour councils like Hounslow, Merton and Ealing, where they are


refusing to raise social care but complaining about social care


funding. He also talked more generally about NHS funding. I'd


just say this... In the last Parliament it wasn't the


conservatives who put funding for the NHS, it was his party who put


funding for the NHS. It wasn't the Conservatives who said funding the


five-year forward view was impossible, it was his party. They


said the cheque would bounce. It hasn't bounced and we are putting


that money in. Tough as it is on the NHS front line, I do say he was


right to raise this issue in this House, but wrong to raise it in the


way he did. The NHS as record doctors, record nurses, record


funding, care, despite the pressures of winter is safer, high-quality and


reaching more people than ever before and it is time to support


those on the front line not try to use them for party political points.


I welcomed the Secretary of State's statement and the Prime Minister's


focus on mental health. She spoke of holding the NHS leadership to


account for the extra billion that will be investing in mental health.


Could the Secretary of State set out in further detail how CCG 's will be


held accountable so we can deliver progress and parity? I can


absolutely do that. We have had a patchy record in the NHS of making


sure money promised for mental health actually reaches the front


line. The way we intend to address this is by independently compiled


Ofsted style ratings for every CCG in the country that actually


highlights where mental health provision is inadequate. Those


ratings are decided by an independent committee chaired by the


same Paul Farmer, who is responsible for the independent task force


report. I am confident we can shine a light on those areas that are not


delivering. After the recent enquiry the Health Select Committee did into


suicide, I absolutely welcome the extra funding to mental health and


I'm sure the Secretary of State remembers some of the discussions we


had in that room. I also pay tribute to the staff and obviously with my


background, I know what it is like when A is swamped when you don't


have anywhere to put people. I don't think the staff across NHS England


are afraid of us discussing this topic and weaponised and yet, they


are in tears, they are exhausted, they are demoralised, they have


never experienced a winter like this. Perhaps the secretary of State


can explain why his figures suggest 19 diverts and only two trusts in


serious problems. Where as what we're hearing from the Nuffield


trust, it is 40 or 50 trusts diverging, which it is absurd. That


means it is widespread. Talking about, and I people going to A who


don't need to be there, but they are not the people three deep on


trolleys waiting for a bed for 36 hours. Those are people who need a


bed and they are ill. We have discussed sustainability on several


occasions and the concern people have is because they don't have the


money to redesign, they are starting with A closures and bed cuts. I


would hope this incident would show that simply isn't possible. It is


not possible for the UK and particularly NHS England to lose any


more beds. In Scotland we face the same problem of increased demand and


shortage of doctors. A 49% of our patients were seen within four hours


in Christmas week. And it is estimated in areas of England, it is


within 50 and 60%. The difference is how it is organised, it is the


fragmentation, the lack of integration. There are things to be


done, use community pharmacies and GPs and try and bring the NHS back


together. I hope the honourable lady won't take offence if I say her


questions must be judged to be rhetorical questions. Secretary of


State. I was handy at-bats, but that was


then! This is now, that was when I was a badly behaved backbencher,


like the honourable gentleman. Secretary of State. I will try to


interpret the questions in what she said. If he is saying are the


problems in England similar to Scotland, I think we share problems,


particularly across the busy winter period and she has observed in


Scotland they are failing to meet targets in Scotland. But she is


right to say bed capacity is an absolutely critical issue. It is an


issue which we have not always got right in England. Beds have been


decommissioned and actually the alternative provision that was


promised has not been made and it has had knock-on effects. When it


comes to what happens in Scotland and England, Scotland has gone


further than England in terms of use of community pharmacy and that is


something to be commended. But England has gone further in our


plans for reforming and increasing investment into general practice,


which is what the president of the Royal College of GPs was talking


about over Christmas, and she is keen for Scotland to match the


package we have done in England. I commend my right honourable friend


for his statement. All of us know the work done in our local areas and


those working for the NHS at such a difficult time. In relation to


mental health, would he confirmed the Prime Minister's welcome speech


this morning emphasised Perrinelle -- Perry mental health but also


emphasise the point of transparency to make sure we know what it is CCGs


are doing and assist members of parliament in the work, not only


when we call for extra resource, but to make sure we play our part in


making sure locally, our area does the best they can in compared with


other areas rather make a general point and resources, which is the


easiest one to make? As my colleague in the Department of Health who did


a huge amount of good work on mental health, and on perinatal mental


health, 20% of mothers suffer some form of postnatal depression and


that has a huge impact on the child, costing around ?10,000 for every


birth in the country caused by lack of proper mental health provision.


This plan today means we can treat an extra 30,000 women, which we


think is the number of women that need to be treated better. On


transparency, he makes an important point. I would put it like this.


Funding matters, but when it comes to mental health, we have some of


the best mental health provision in the world, but it is inconsistent.


The only way we can get it consistent is by shining a light on


the different parts of the country, so we can bring all areas up to the


standards of the best. Mr Dennis Skinner. Is the Minister aware, when


he says there are 9 million more patient visits now, as opposed to


the year 2000, it makes no sense at all that in that climate, shutting


hospitals like the Community Hospital in Bolsover, and the


Secretary of State turns a blind eye to it, will he look at this question


because when you shut those hospitals, the beds are gone for


ever. Get stuck in. I actually think he does make an important point. It


isn't just about decisions to downgrade or close A when there


isn't alternative provision, but it is community hospitals, which are


important places for A and hospitals to step people down to. He


is right, I am getting comments, but this is a process that has been


going on in the NHS for decades and we have not always got it right


under both parties. But he is right is said we need to make sure when


there are changes in provision and community hospitals, we have good,


alternative plans. Order. In wishing two members of the best in the weeks


and months ahead, I Andrea Jenkins. First of all I would like to echo


some of the points the Secretary of State has made. Regarding the


support the mental health for expectant mothers. As one myself,


the midwife has been fantastic right from the very first appointments, at


grassroots level. We are feeling it on the ground.


while 50 young people in Yorkshire received care the mental health, how


would this new approach address the concerns of young people and their


parents and what measures are in to reduce the waiting list? I would


like to add my very good wishes and my confidence that she would get


superb care from the NHS and thank her for her campaigning and


patients' safety. She will be pleased to hear... In numbers, the


plan that we are outlining will mean that we are treating a million more


people a year with mental health conditions when it comes to young


people an additional 70,000 people will get treatment every single year


and that will I hope bring down the Camhs waiting times. But, we also


want to do work in schools to stop people getting on this waiting list


in the first place. The young mind survey before Christmas showed that


in 50% of clinical commissioning group areas there is a failure to


spend the full amount of investment allocated to children and young


people's mental health. Which is scandalous. I noted his point about


Ofsted like ratings, but doesn't he need instant use a system that


guarantees that the money for children's mental health is spent as


intended? He is writes to want to make sure that we live up to those


promises that matter he is right. He was a minister when some of them


were made and they are important promises. But I would say to him


that we are delivering what he wants, we are on track this year to


spending over a billion more compared to when he was Minister for


mental health. It has taken time for the NHS to get their message on


mental health but is getting through loud and clear. As a frequent user


of the Red Cross myself, and admirer of it I regard their claims of being


over the top. I'd join with the Minister in his tribute to the


front-line staff of the NHS. Would he agree with me that these


pressures are not in the go away and there must be a continuing drive for


reform and to do these things better? And what will he tell the


House, what are the impediments in the NHS to the sharing of best


practice and secondly what steps is he creating, is he taking to create


a more experienced and better trained leadership who are more


prepared for the exceptional medical and management challenges the NHS


now faces? Well, my right honourable is friend speaks extremely wisely


and I think we have to be careful about the language we use in these


situations, because many honourable people can be frightened if you get


the tone wrong and the vast majority of NHS services are performing


extremely well. His point and leadership is important, and one I


have given a lot of thought to come at the heart of it the problem is


that in this country, we don't have enough hospitals being run by


doctors and nurses. Alain 56% of our managers have a clinical at ground,


-- around 56%. Which compares to 96% in Sweden, to put it bluntly doctors


like to be given instructions by other doctors. If you are an


exceptional person, non-clinical background you can do it, but it is


hard because doctors are highly experienced people, so I have put in


place measures to try and make it easier for more clinicians to become


an managers of the future. In wishing the honourable member for


Liverpool way victory... In her speech to date the Prime Minister


made a number of many hard-hitting observations, she said "There is no


excluding the fact that people with mental health problems are not


treated the same as if they had a physical ailment." She told us about


the shocking reality that an average 13 people take their life every


single day in England. Given that the Conservative Party has been in


government for almost seven years and the Secretary of State has been


Health Secretary for almost four of those years, he does he think is


responsible for the PowerBook failures highlighted by the pie


minister today? -- I think that is a totally inappropriate question. With


great respect to her, and she campaigned tirelessly on mental


health and deserves great credit and that is, that is the same as saying


that the last Labour government should have sorted out every single


problem in mental health by 2010, and another stunning him and saying


that because the truth is that we have made good progress. If she


thinks it's trivial but we are treating 400 people every day... She


should go inspectors some of her constituencies who are getting


access to mental health... We have made big strides but there is much


more to do and we are determined to do what it takes. Recognising that a


supply of extra resources for the NHS will be a rifle and continuing


issue, isn't my right honourable friend right when he says that equal


attention needs to be given to controlling demand so that people


don't instinctively make calls an GP services in any department which


doctors themselves believe are avoidable and can be dealt with in


other ways? I think my right honourable friend 's beak is


extremely wisely and at the heart of it, we have a good commitment,


before our commitment. -- speaks extremely wisely. I think it is one


of the best thing the NHS does, the problem that it you are ill we will


do something about it in four hours. However, if you have a situation


which NHS England describes as of the 30% of people don't taxi need to


be there, then you risk not being able to deliver that promised the


people that axiom do need it. Looking at control of demand for


people who don't need to be in Amy 's, and -- Amy Makros. He seems to


believe blaming the public for... He well knows that the reason the


public go to Amy is because they can't get their GP and social care


is in crisis. Will he confirm that he has announced a significant


watering down of the four hour commitment and what is he personally


doing to address the chronic long-term underperformance of


hospitals like that of Worcester where two people died and trolleys.


And Plymouth who wear one of the hospitals that had to call in the


Red Cross. I think probably because of the fall and that we are in now


he is misinterpreting what I have said, but it needs to be put right.


-- because of the fall. I have not watered down the four our target I


have recommitted the government to. Maybe he wasn't listening but I just


said that I thought it was one of the best things about the NHS. But,


the public will go to the place where it is easier to get in front


of a doctor quickly and if we don't recognise that there is an issue


with the fact that people who don't need to go to Amy Makros are going


there we won't make their needs better by his constituencies and


mind. If he asked what are we doing to in difficulty, we have introduced


a new chief inspector of hospitals, which his party tried to write down.


Mr Speaker can I welcome the Prime Minister's announcement and the


Secretary of State's confirmation about the extra support the mental


health and particularly welcomed the review to be led by Lord Stevenson,


as they carry out that review into improving businesses ability to


support people with mental health problems can they look at how we can


help smaller businesses, those that don't have the human resource


expertise that larger businesses may have, to make sure that people with


mental health and stay in work and are able to get back into work when


they fall out of work. They are the biggest single category of disabled


people not currently working and we could make a huge difference. He


will know that from his distinguished time as a minister in


the blue WP -- in the DWP. We are trying to address the fact that if


someone stops going to work, is signed off because of severe


depression, that is ad for the individual and for the business.


But, too often what happens is then it becomes entirely the NHS's


responsibility to get that person after work. And the business think


it's not their responsibility not any more. But with help from the


business we could get that has them back to work much more quickly,


which would mean they would recover more quickly and the business


wouldn't lose so much money. We will never solve the challenges facing


the NHS and social care until there is a long-term settlement for


funding both. Does the Secretary of State understand that the social


care preset is completely inadequate to filling in the gap and will


increase inequalities because the areas that most need probably bonded


pair will be least able to raise that money? Will he speak to the


Chancellor and this the energy secretary to look again at this


issue and get the funding social care desperately needs? I do agree


with hair that there are serious funding pressures and social care


and we need a long-term solution to this and we are doing important work


on that. I think the preset is part of the solution the local government


settlement has been adjusted to take account of the different spending


powers or revenue raising powers of wealthier counties and local


authority areas compared to other areas. We have to take into account


the equality issue. But, issue saying how we sold the whole


problem, the answer is no there was more work to do. Can I welcome the


statement that could I pay a huge tribute to everyone working at


Nottingham University trust especially inanely and especially in


the nine days between Christmas and January the 2nd -- especially in the


nine days. There are hundred and 80 people in the Amy Department seeking


treatment, 395 more admissions then discharges in that nine-day period.


So, we'll huge tribute to everyone. Could I get an assurance that he


will continue to work with our hospital trusts as they bring


forward plans to change schemes, it's not just simply about money,


and do everything he can to support them? I am happy to do that and I


will echo her praise for this staff at Nottingham University trust, who


I know where particularly pressured over Christmas, and two I know made


particular efforts to improve patient safety at the recent years.


But, she's absolutely right and I will continue to work closely with


her trust. At 930 this morning I received an e-mail from a


constituent in Coventry who asked me to bring it to the Secretary of


State's attention and I'm late to do so. She writes as fied "I'm an nice


with 26 years experience who is always worked full-time -- I'm an


nice. But I have gladly served and given 100% to do it. Unfortunately,


my 18-year-old daughter has recently become and were mentally and


attempted suicide twice in a three-week period. I'm sad to say,


this comes in nursery 26 years experience. The care she has been


given is appalling. I expect that as a family who gave so much to society


and still do, when it is our time in need we can expect a service that


meets our needs. " Could you arrange... She continues that she


has been waiting six months without any mental health assessment or


support from the NHS, six months for a daughter of 18 years of age. Will


he agreed to meet her so it's just not more hollow words? I am more


than happy to meet her, but I would rather, what I would like to do


ahead of that is to look at the particular issue as to why she has


to wait so long. He puts it very eloquently, and she puts eloquently,


we Of thank you. The House of, is


library calculated the real terms increase in health related spending


between 2010 and 2016 in England was 9.4%. But it was zero in Wales. Not


only are A waiting times longer in Wales than in England but routine


procedures can take two and a half times longer in Wales. I regularly


see constituents in tears waiting well in excess of the year for hip


operations. Would the secretary of state agreed that the party opposite


must start acknowledging the challenges that the NHS Wales and


responsibility for them? I think his constituents in Wales would be


appalled by the reaction we have just had then. They stand on their


high horse complaining about NHS care in England but when he brings


up poor NHS care in Wales they make noises as if they don't want to hear


it. If they care about NHS patients, they should care about them through


the whole of the United Kingdom. NHS care in Wales is worse and they need


to do something about it. Avec Cooper. I have been contacted by


several constituents who spent 14 hours in A waiting for a bed. We


have been hampered by social care cuts, by a shortage of A doctors.


Some think the health department was warned would become a growing


problem over five years ago. And the Health Select Committee warned about


again last year. When will this shortage of A doctors be ended by


the government, by the summer? By next year, the following year? He


has had seven years. When will he deal with the shortage of A


doctors? The number of A doctors have gone up since 2010 by 1002 and


that, over 50% increase. The number of A consultants has gone up by


20%. We have recruited 2000 more paramedics and as a result of those


changes, are a emergency departments are seeing, within the four hour


target, 2500 people more every single day, compared to 2010. It is


not to minimise the pressures in the NHS over winter and that doesn't say


there isn't more that needs to be done, which is why I outlined a


number of things in my statement. The Secretary of State came to see


the plans of the emergency room at Worthing hospital. I hope next time


he comes he can look at the Community Hospital and the mental


health services as well. Can I put to him on the child mental health


care, we have 700,000 teenagers going through each year, each stage


and a quarter of them will have bumps and need resilience. The


parents and teachers need help, can he make sure the Green paper covers


advice to parents and teachers so they know what's in the normal range


of behaviours and what is outside them? Can I commend the right


honourable gentleman for his one-man campaign against the misinformation


put out by 38 degrees, which I continue to admire on many


occasions. Also thank the staff at Worthing hospital for their


fantastic work over the busy period. He puts his finger on a very


important issue, which is, as we seek to raise the profile of mental


health treatment for children and young people, what we mustn't do is


medicalise every single moments of stress, worries before exams, those


are not a cause to talk to an NHS psychiatrist. A lot of our work on


the green paper will be how we can promote self health, support schools


to help people but when they do need NHL 's help, they get it quickly. It


is great to see the Secretary of State here in the chamber after


enjoying his Christmas recess. While he was away, stuff on the NHS front


line had to work double shifts. The London Ambulance Service computer


system crashed. And we also found the Red Cross needed to be drafted


into our hospitals. Can the Secretary of State tell us today,


which hospitals he personally visited during the Christmas recess?


Let me just say, I was in touch with what was happening in the NHS every


day throughout the Christmas recess. But as someone who has worked in a


hospital herself, she might perhaps think about whether it is


particularly helpful for NHS hospitals to have visits by


high-profile politicians right at their busiest period. But I have


been very closely in touch. She talked about the problems at London


Ambulance Service, which was a problem, which staff had been


trained to deal with. I just say to her, her own hospital, the staff


worked extremely well. What they don't welcome is the attempts, I


think she is making this afternoon, to try to politicise the the NHS


faces. In connection with the changes to the four hour stand of


the Secretary of State has heralded, what does he think can be done to


incentivise and upscale GPs, who may wish to a closer interest in minor


and moderate illnesses, including the use of nurse led minor injury


units? These have a very important role and I think if we look at some


of the most successful and best performing trusts in the country


like Luton and Dunstable for example, what they do is they have a


very good streaming process at the front door with good alternatives


for people who are not appropriate to go into an A department. Nurse


led units can be important, GP led units can make a difference as well.


It won't be the same everywhere, for reasons of space and nothing else,


but there is a solution everyone can adopt. We have seen in the last few


weeks, pressures in the NHS, but what is surprising to me, given we


are not in the midst of a desperate cold spell yaps, we're not in the


throes of a flu epidemic, how can the secretary of state come here


today and I think in place in league, suggest he has a grip on the


services in the NHS. I'd like to know why he wasn't on top of those


trusts he knew for a week and potentially under threat if any


pressure occurred. What will he do when we hit the cold snap and people


are suffering from flu in large numbers? I reject that suggestion


and if you want to know what we have been doing over the course of the


year, as I said in my statement, we have 1600 more doctors than a year


ago. Over 3000 more nurses. We have the biggest flu vaccination in our


history, we have additional GP sessions booked over the festive


period. There was a huge amount of work being done and the particular


focus on distressed areas. Many of those distressed areas did cope


extremely well, not all of them, which is why there is more work to


do. The health committee in the last parliament luck that children's


mental health services and one of the main concerns was distances


travelled by patients, sometimes halfway across the country to get


treatment. Can you expand on his plans, and is it a new form of


gatekeeper and can he keep drunks out of A? Rather than the phrase


gatekeeper, I would use the word streaming and make sure we have


alternative offers for people who don't need to be in A departments.


That is not safe for A departments to have people there for six or


eight hours, it is distracting for staff and harder for them to do with


people who have more immediate needs. In terms of the distances


travelling, it is an acceptable for people to go 400 miles for a mental


health bed. What is the solution? We are commissioning more beds, but the


solution is to intervene earlier, so people don't get to the stage in


treatment where they need inpatient care. We know if we intervene


earlier, in many cases, we can head off that need and help people get


better quickly. This afternoon, the patients in Nottingham are waiting


for more than four hours. In the last month, figures are available,


3500 people who had to wait for more than four hours in the emergency


department. We cannot go on like this. Will he agree to fast-track


the capital we need to increase capacity at Nottingham's emergency


department? I will happily take a look at that and when it comes to


the allocation of capital, we do prioritise any project that will


help improve the situation in any department and reduce stresses. The


Secretary of State has acknowledged there is a shortage of acute mental


health beds and there's arises from a decision by many health trusts to


close beds and favour putting resources into services in the


community. One effect of this, people approaching and mental health


crisis find it harder to know where to turn for help. Will he explain


more about the crisis provision in which we are now investing this


extra ?50 million, and in particular is there a common way of knowing how


one can easily access these vital services? I am happy to supply more


details. The ?50 million is for places of safety that is


specifically focused on support for the police service, so we can make


sure we live up to what will be our legal commitment from this year, not


to send young people into police cells, when actually what they need


is a mental health support. But more broadly, he is right, there is a


policy change, which I think most people think is the right thing,


which is to treat more people in the community where we possibly can.


What I think is not working is the system which divides people up into


40 years. Sometimes we say to people, we cannot treat you because


we are in TF three and you are not sick enough. That is not acceptable


and that is why we are doing this Green paper and we want to look at a


way forward. Does the Secretary of State accept it is not solely down


just to an ageing society in the crisis and deepening crisis of the


NHS and the failure to provide sufficient funding is the key to


this crisis and therefore it is possible to address and what will he


do about it? If she is worried about funding, she might explain why


funding for the NHS in England went up by double the rate than funding


in Scotland over the last Parliament. But she is right... I


will get heard the figures on Northern Ireland. I say that by way


of reference. But let me agree with her, as well as apologising for my


earlier error, let me agree with her, it isn't just about the ageing


society. It is also about changing consumer expectations, people want


access to health care 20 47 today in a way that wasn't the case ten or 20


years ago and that is a cause of a lot of the additional pressure. I


welcome this announcement on mental health and it is clear the


government is serious about improving mental health treatment


and prevention. The challenge is to translate ambitions into action. Can


my right honourable friend assure me he will put in place mechanisms to


make sure these proposals and those in the five-year forward view for


mental health become reality? And specifically, would he look that one


step is to make sure that no STD is signed off without clear plans of


funding for improving mental health care. -- STP. It is happening and


one of the key metrics by which we will be junked judging STPs. She is


right ambitions need to be turned into action. But because of the


Commons that she and many other members have made over the last few


years, she will find there is much more understanding in the NHS that


this is a big priority. We need to stop resources constantly being


sucked into the acute sector, as has happened over many years. The


Secretary of State announced the government were pressing ahead with


significant cuts to community pharmacy budget in the Department of


Health, in the face of huge opposition from members of both


sides of hours, members of the public and health care


professionals. Given evidence one in five people, who would normally see


a pharmacist for medical advice, say they will make a GP appointment if


the local pharmacist is closed and in areas of high deprivation I moan,


it is four in five. Many of these people will turn about the local


hospital in desperation. Isn't the government in danger of making an


appalling crisis in the NHS even worse? We are having to ask the


pharmacy sector to make efficiency savings, just as we are asking all


part of the NHS make efficiency savings. 40% of pharmacies are


clustered in groups of three or more. Does make sense for the to


continue to subsidise pharmacies that are very close to river


pharmacies, so this is to ensure that where there is only one local


pharmacy, that pharmacies protected. Does my right honourable friend


acknowledge the damaging effect that loneliness can have on mental


health, and will he join me in welcoming the Jo Cox loneliness


commission later this month? I am happy to do that and to acknowledge


the importance of this issue, when it comes to older people per latest


figures I have seen is that 5 million older people say that their


main form of company if the television. That is not acceptable


and we all have the responsibility to do better in that the spec. Not


just from moral point of view but from a practical point of view, this


leads to people more likely to need hospital treatment which is


expensive and challenging for the NHS. Thank you Mr Speaker. The


secretary of this date has talked a great deal about preventing people


getting to A by intervening much earlier, yet surely he has to do


recognise that the cuts that have been made to local authorities, in


social care make it much more likely that people will not be picked up


earlier in the progress of any illness and will go and have to


resort to the health service in a much more difficult situation. Can't


he now have a discussion with his colleagues on the front bench and


tell them, particularly the Chancellor, that they have got this


wrong, we have to do invest in preventative services, we funding


authorities not cutting. It means investing in proper social care, not


the ?5 billion of cuts that we have seen in social persons 2020,


otherwise the pressure on our NHS will discontinue. Actually, I agree


with her broad points about the importance of the social care system


and its interconnectedness with the NHS and we faced in 2010 as you well


knows, because her party's manifesting the fact that this is


well, we faced a very challenging economic situation in which both


parties recognised the need for cuts to be made in public spending, but


what teams in 2015 at least in our party 's manifesto was the


recognition that actually when it came to social care we need to make


sure we increased funding into the social care. And all local


authorities are now able to increase funding for social care in real


terms and I hope we can start turning things around. Thank you


very much, with the recent educational select committee report


on children in care in mind I certainly welcome the Prime


Minister's be focused on mental health and the Secretary of State's


continued support of action to be taken, but what steps does he has in


mind to deliver actual practical steps given that we found that local


integration, effective relationships and the teaching of PSA cheeks all


helped to produce good outcomes. I think he's absolutely right and


obviously his role in the select committee will give him a particular


insight into this. But, we don't want to rush to come to a solution


on this which is why we will simply do a green paper before the end of


the year because it is complex. As the other honourable members have


alluded to the risk of metallising problems when we know that all young


people at school have periods of stress and anxiety and worry that an


diagnosable mental health conditions and we wouldn't want to make them as


such. So, this is about thinking through a smart way to improve


self-help and also to educate school so that they are able to spot when


this is just a temporary period, in the run-up to exams or whatever, or


whether it could be something a lot more serious like OCD or an eating


disorder or something that needs more immediate help. That is


something went to date we have started a big education programmes


with schools ball and go further. Q. I would like to welcome the extra


investment if it turns out to be extra investment in mental health. I


wanted to push the Secretary of State and the question around


educational psychology and how that is going to work in, I speak as a


mother of a child with SEN issues who has relied on clinical and


educational psychology in schools and the school where my children


currently goes to is increasing the class sizes and 30 to 33 and


reducing the teaching staff specifically those who engage in SEN


children, because of changes to educational funding. I wondered the


Secretary of State and tell me how he thinks that will affect the


children's mental health in my children's school? I think she


raises an important issue and I know that I have had constituents and I'm


sure she has as well, where they found access to educational


psychologists difficult and couldn't get a plan approved that they needed


to. This is what we will be considering in the build-up to the


green paper and I would encourage her to participate in the process.


Thank you, will the Health Secretary please get the message out there


loud and clear to health bosses up and down the country that we need


more capacity in our A so that when people come forward to NHS


England with the request for money for their appalling plan to


downgrade my local A, all those Huddersfield Royal Infirmary replace


it with a small unit with smaller bets, that that money would be


better spent on front line a need care. I of course take seriously


everything he says and I will say this, the NHS doesn't always get


these things right. I led a campaign against an A closure in my own


constituency when as a backbencher. And the party apps it was empower


and they were about to take a wholly mistaken decision. Bass macro Dub


party opposite was in power. So we will look carefully, and I do


think that the broader point he makes is that we have to understand


that the pasty matters. I would say that in the long run we are not


going to solve this problem simply by the increasing capacity in a any.


Because we need alternative forms of provision. Bass macro capacity in


the A We need to find ways of... That is what we are exploring. I


declare an interest as my husband is an A consultant. If the Secretary


of State would speak to him he would tell him that the extra pressure on


A, as we have had, because of the disappearance of preventative power


of social care, and of other services. It's not individuals


arriving at a any who should and it is other services with varying


people to A when they shouldn't. -- referring people. Would the


Secretary of State take responsibility for his government's


decisions over eight years that have panned out to be false economies of


cutting services back to the bone. With respect, I agree with the broad


principle that preventative care is absolutely vital, I disagree with


the suggestion that this has been cut to the bone. We had an increase


of 5% more and peas Tuohy GPs last parliament. -- and increase of 5%


more GPs. Both at the last election and the one before, the party


promising the most resources for the NHS was on this side and not on her


side. Everyone knows the Secretary of State has an impossible job which


he does with humanity and energy, but the two tier system that we had


depending on where you live, in the North Lincolnshire you can wait


three weeks to see a doctor or two hours for an ambulance to come, on


top of lack of investment. Two hours people of weighted lying in the


street waiting for an ambulance. This is not acceptable. -- people


have waited. I just wonder whether we don't need to start an honest


discussion with the people about how we're going to devote more resources


to help in this country, perhaps social in Shawlands models or


leaving, God forbid, charging people who don't turn up to appointment. --


social in Shawlands models. I don't agree with moving to a social in


Shawlands model, but the broader issue is something that I do have


some sympathy with. We have to recognise that if we're going to


have a million more over 65 is, over the decades ahead we will have to


find a way to continue to invest more in our health and social care


systems. This year we are doing that women extra 3.8 billion, over the


decades ahead governments will continue to need to do. He had led


rightly a specific problem, which I don't have the solution to. But I


understand the problem that in ball areas the book away too long for


ambulances. This system of targets that we have in sensor size


Ambulance Services... That is something that I will look at. The


Secretary of State houses he has a strategy, so I issue me must be on


top of these facts. Can I ask him, as the latest count this week how


many beds where being locked in hospitals by people that could be


discharged but there went the facilities in the community? More


than a third of A attendances at peak times are caused by jewel in


this, which is unacceptable and irresponsible, what more can we do


the hugely reduced that proportion by this time next year? -- caused by


the slump in this. I think the issue he raises is one about public


responsibility, these are our National Health Service is and we


need to treat them in a responsible way and it is selfish to behave in


an irresponsible way and create pressure on an A which means that


somebody else who needs the help might not be able to get it. Is the


Secretary of State accusing the Red Cross of weapon I think the National


Health Service, and secondly can I say when the NHS is making courts


the services that supper time and time again are the so-called


Cinderella services ie mental health services. The only way to prevent


that is to ring fence that funding. Finally, the other thing that


happens is when you cut local authority services to the bone is


that they can only provide strategy services. What is stopping the


Secretary of State commissioning and all parties group to look at the


sustainable long-term funding model for social care? The Prime Minister


has said that we need to find a long-term solution to the funding of


social care and that is work that is ongoing and we recognise the urgency


of the situation. But, I would simply say, the evidence about


whether or not services for mental health are reaching the front line


is whether actually more money is being spent on mental health


provision then in previous years and it is about ability of pounds more


being spent 20 years ago. Thank you. The AA in me at Worcester and


Alexandra Hospital in Redditch have been under huge pressure. -- be a


any macro. Can he reassure patients that all is being done to help


alleviate the situation now, and also what we really need at odd


trust is a capital bid of 29 million to be agreed to increase capacity to


alleviate this problem. I totally recognise that and I want to thank


her for her interest on behalf of her own constituents in what has


been happening. Subject to staffing there will be a new ward opening at


the trust next week. We have a new Chief Executive arriving at the


trust in the spring. We recognised the need for capital spending to


increase capacity of both the Alex and the Royal and we will look


sympathetically at that. He couldn't resist his customary political


attack on the Wells NHS, I had cause to visit my local hospital to go to


a new macro with a family member. And there was a speedy and expect


service. -- go to my Amy macro. Can I invite him to congratulate the


Welsh Labour government and not having to call in the Red Cross and


to congratulate them on their long standing emphasis on mental health


meaning we spend more per capita in Wales than in England or indeed any


part of the UK notwithstanding the ?2 billion cut he has made to the


Welsh budget in the last six years? What he wasn't prepared to say


people wait twice as long very hip replacement in Wales, more than


double the proportion of the double the proportion of the


population are on a waiting list for NHS care, that's one in seven people


in Wales compared to one in one in 15 in England and you are 40 times


more likely to be waiting for a diagnostic test result waiting too


long for a test result in Wales compared to England. Thank you, Mr


Speaker. The Secretary of State will be aware that our hospitals have


been under pressure due to be demographics and ageing population.


Will he agree that it's encouraging Will he agree that it's encouraging


to hear work being done on Friday to make sure doctors can be available


to those who need them and that people are sent away to specialists


who can help them like a physiotherapist rather than taking


up vital GP appointments? Indeed. I congratulate all the NHS and social


care staff in Derby doing a fantastic job. Also on the


pioneering work we have done, which I know has made a huge difference to


his constituents. Over the New Year, East Midlands Ambulance Service saw


life-threatening calls up 42% on life-threatening calls up 42% on


last year. Beauty of Nottingham last year. Beauty of Nottingham


University Hospital trust described the emergency department as pushed


to the limit. The honourable member has already said almost double the


normal number of hospital admissions. Clearly these were


necessary attendances but surely many of them could have been


prevented. He has already acknowledged the connection between


inadequate social care and this is inadequate social care and this is


entirely foreseeable prices. I ask again, will he commit his Government


to properly fund it? I just find these questions about funding


curious coming from a party that had we followed their plans would be


spending ?1.3 billion less on the NHS this year compared to what the


NHS is actually getting. I just say to them the reason that we are able


to spend that extra money on the NHS is because we know how to run the


economy. It's all too often been the case that mental health patients


have wondered if this issue actually has another leadership. I'm pleased


to see the Prime Minister made one of her earlier speeches on this


particular issue. While no one in this house would oppose an extra 1.4


billion being invested, this Parliament echoes the words of the


chief executive, the proof will be chief executive, the proof will be


in the investment -- the impact this investment has an day-to-day


experiences. While the minister meet with me to discuss the plans for a


new psychiatric and demented unit in Bath in order to service the whole


of the south-west? I am happy on his behalf to ask the Minister to meet


him to discuss that psychiatric unit. -- dementia. The proof of the


pudding is in the eating. This is the first time I can remember that a


Prime Minister has made her first major speech on the NHS about mental


health and talked about the importance of sorting out mental


health on the steps of Downing Street as she arrived. That is a


sign of the commitment coming right from the job. The fabulous team at


Imperial St Mary 's in west London are featuring any TV programme this


week. The cheese service for emergency care is reported as


saying, we have just had our worst ten days on record, there is nowhere


in the hospital to move anybody. What happened in the two years, the


whole system country wind has grown to a halt. Part of that is because


there is more than the goblet of a ward of patients at any time you


cannot move out of the hospital because there is nowhere for them to


go. Does the Secretary of State except his Government has gone too


far in the destruction of local Government finance, including social


care, and does he accept that despite all the rhetoric, next year


and local Government finance will go down not up? First of all, I would


like to thank the staff at Imperial alongside other NHS staff and


utterly fantastic job over a utterly fantastic job over a


difficult period. 50% of councils difficult period. 50% of councils


have got no delayed discharges of care. Whilst this is a problem in


many hospitals, there are many areas managing to deal with this problem.


That's why I would suggest the local authorities that serve her


constituencies should look at other parts of that are dealing with this


problem. I welcome the provision of mental health facilities services


for schools, but will it use either the type of first aid he is


proposing for this is available to MPs and their staff? Given the


number of people with mental health problems that we deal with. Is an


absolutely excellent suggestion. I'm very happy to take it up. The


problems we've been hearing in A E throughout the afternoon are


symptomatic of problems elsewhere in the system. If you take Aintree


Hospital, where the staff are doing a fantastic job in very difficult


circumstances, a patients as of today are medically fit for


discharge. Social services are simply unable to support them to go


home or to go into care elsewhere. He needs to accept the cuts of ?4.6


billion to social services was a mistake. He needs to accept the


better care fund is simply not delivering, it is money


recycled from elsewhere in the recycled from elsewhere in the


system and if you look at the figures in Sefton, Sefton were


promised 9 million, they have had less than 1 million. If he is


serious about sorting out the problems in social care over the


long term, he needs to get the funding right and he needs to


reinvest all of those cuts that have been made. I do except there needs


to be more funding going into social care, that's why we're putting an


extra ?3.5 billion into social care around by the end of Parliament.


What I would say to him is that even despite the very real pleasures in


social care, there are many local authority areas, many hospitals that


have no delayed discharges of care at all. Half of all the delayed


discharges are just 20 local authorities. As we wait for that


funding to come on stream, it's not all coming on stream at the start of


Parliament, there's lots that can be done. Can I thank the Secretary of


State for paying tribute to front line staff, I declare an interest to


someone who worked over the NHS over the Christmas period and saw


first-hand the pressures front line staff are facing. These winter


pressures are replaced every year, certainly in my 20 expenses of


working as a nurse. -- 20 years. Would he also paid tribute to mental


health care nurses in Sussex and Sussex Police? Who by their joint


working have reduced the amount of patients who have been placed in a


prison cell, as the place of safety by 50% and Digne County Beachy head,


that is a huge achievement. First of all, I welcome your contribution to


this House as a practising night. I am more than happy to pay tribute to


our brilliant mental health and those who I think have one of the


most stressful jobs you can have. Particularly those in Sussex with


particular tragic suicide hotspots. With the cold weather coming, could


I return to the point of the flu epidemic risk and see that a


desperate doctor wrote to me last night to say, sooner or later there


will be an epidemic and, lately tell you, we cannot cope. Another shift,


and other full hospital, and other gridlocked ana, more desperate and


desperate patients. Another 14 or 13 hour shift with 110 minute break.


Some patients and relatives get angry, some despair, most watchers


and realise we can't physically do anything more. Please help me as the


MPT represent her and please help us MPT represent her and please help us


to have more staff. -- MPs. That Doctor speaks for many doctors who


are working incredibly hard, particularly in our emergency


department. I would say to that department. I would say to that


doctor that we recognise the need for more doctors, we are recruiting


more doctors, not just across the NHS but in emergency departments in


particular. We also recognise that we need to find a different way of


dealing with some of the patients who come to the hospital front door


so we can alleviate that pressure and that's what we are looking at. I


my constituency, an award winning my constituency, an award winning


charity which improves the well-being of those suffering from


mental health conditions. I welcome the Prime Minister's and enter this


morning raising awareness of that ongoing stigma with regards to


mental health. As well of course is the ?1 billion investment and the


commitment to improving services. Would the minister be prepared to


investigate such schemes as the one I have mentioned to ensure the


treatment of those suffering from mental health is not simply limited


to the provision of medication? I am prepared to do that. I think we do


need to be very open-minded about the fact that mental health in some


ways is a relatively new field, research as to what works best is


continuing to uncover many new things. Much of that research is


happening in this country. There has been a big move away from thinking


that medication is with the best way forward. We have seen a huge


expansion in therapies over the last two years in this country and that


trend will continue. Thank you. Despite the best efforts of


dedicated NHS staff, patients attending one of my local A E were


told they would have to wait 11 hours just to be seen. People were


in hospital trolleys for almost 20 hours routinely. Mental health


patients were sent to Colchester because that was the nearest


inpatient bed available for a 17-year-old and somebody I know


waited six hours for a 999 ambulance, despite calling nine NN


three times. We can do better than this, Secretary of State. To that


end, I implore you, plead with you, to intervene and suspend the


needless downgrade of Dewsbury and Huddersfield hospital, the downgrade


of which will cost lives. None of the examples of poor care that she


talks about remotely acceptable. Let me say to her that on my watch and I


this Government we will see no return to the bad old days where


people were routinely waiting far too long. We are recognising the


problems we've just had and we are absolutely determined to make sure


we suck them out. With respect to her local hospital reconfiguration,


if it ends up on my desk because preferred that by the local health


scrutiny committee and I then referred to the Independent


reconfiguration panel, I will then look at the matter very carefully.


-- sort it out. Mr Speaker, I would like to welcome the Secretary of


State statement today and the focus on mental health. In particular, the


mention of the suicide prevention strategy and the 1 billion funding


commitment to improving services. Mental health is something that


often doesn't just affect the patient but the families and those


closest and dearest to them who care for them. Does he agree that raising


awareness and tackling the ongoing stigma of mental health is a vital


part of our work on mental health? Yes. She is absolutely right to


mention that. I would say this is an area we can approach with some


optimism as to the potential for change. If she looks at the progress


we've made in the last four years on dementia, there is a day that goes


past without something being in the newspapers about dementia and the


understanding of dementia has changed dramatically. I think we can


change attitudes and we absolutely need to do that. The only way you


can get help to people any mental health crisis is if they talk about


to change. I entirely agree with the to change. I entirely agree with the


comments being made about the pressures on GP services, the


pressures on preventative health and social care, but I want to ask about


mental health services for students. In the first few weeks of time this


year at Bristol University, there were three suspected suicides and I


know from speaking to a doctor who runs the student health services bet


presented with the mental health presented with the mental health


issues has grown a lot over recent years. What can be Secretary of


State tell us to reassure us that students leaving home for the first


time and going to university that there are going to be in safe hands?


I had a very interesting afternoon visiting the suicide prevention unit


at Bristol Royal Infirmary and had a very good discussion about what they


do. They do some pioneering things there. I learned a great deal from


it. We have a particular concern about the growth in mental


ill-health amongst women aged 18 to 24, it has shown is that the good


growth. We are very concerned about today, the Prime Minister announced,


but we have updated the suicide prevention strategy to make sure


that all part of the country can learn from best practice, including


places like best. Garryowen thank you Mr Speaker. I welcome to date's


an expert on mental health. The key challenge often is to identify those


who need help and support. Will the Secretary of State agreed to meet


with the Department for Work and Pensions to look at ways that we can


help signpost those identified through the independent payment is


processed to signpost them to the additional support of help


available? Can I reassure my honourable friend


that those meetings are already happening? We have a paper in. We


are trying to speed up access to mental health services for people on


benefit to the canal to be more independent every address their


mental health issue more quickly. Thank you. I'd just like to pick up


on a point that the Secretary of State made about the right sort of


pension arriving at a and E. -- A An elderly constituent of mine, Pat,


had pneumonia like symptoms but didn't want to get and a dumb act to


A to put pressure on, said she rang up the helpline and was told


there was 100 people in front of her. She went to A because she


thought she was going to die and she waited 24 hours for a bed. This is


unacceptable, as you know. With the Secretary of State agree that the


that there is urgent and immediate demand for out of hours doctors. If


so, what will you do about it? She is right. People like her


constituent, we need to have better alternatives to A and sometimes


they don't exist, but one of the things they need to do is to make


sure that people call 111 who need to speak to a clinician can do so


quickly. One of the things they are piloted very successfully in other


parts of the country is better than supervision of people in care homes,


who are sometimes the most vulnerable patients. This is one of


the things you're looking at, but also direction of travel. We need to


find better ways fall for her constituent and people like them.


Thank you. In sparsely populated rural Lincolnshire, vital reforms to


health and social care risk of being undermined by the performance of the


Midlands Ambulance Service. We have a Police and Crime Commissioner who


said his officers are routinely effectively acting as ambulance


drivers. I narrowly understand the problems we face in rural


Lincolnshire but can you agree with me that, as it is currently


constituted, East Midlands Ambulance Service is not selling the rural of


an area as well as its staff was due and as well as my constituents need


to? -- wanted to. As discussed earlier, when the honourable


gentleman from Gainsborough spoke, I think there are areas where the


service that the Ambulance Service providers to rural areas is not as


good as it could be because of reverse incentives around the way


the target work. I have been nervous about changing the targets because I


think then that can sometimes be taken as a signal to relax, when I'm


absolutely determined that we should meet the current targets but I did


make a commitment to you honourable gentleman of Gainsborough that I


will look into this is and I will do so. Thank you. Alas yeah, in


Sheffield, just 67% of category one red ambulance calls were answered


within eight minutes. At each, I met a constituent whose husband died


while he waited two hours for an ambulance. -- two hours and 40


minutes. How can you stand on the dispatch box and say the


underfunding of our NHS is not linked with these irresponsible


response times? Of course, what happened in vegetation is totally


unacceptable, but -- in that situation. It is a mistake to bring


this back to finding, it is by pressures, models of care. In the


case of the Ambulance Services, just to reassure her that the extra


funding that has gone in, we have around 200 more ambulances, around


200 more paramedics and the annual and services are doing every day at


around 3400 blue light called more than it was doing six years ago.


There has been a significant investment but more has to happen.


-- calls. Thank you. The number of mental health patients in police


cells is rightfully down by 80%. People have bravely come to my


surgery, in my constituency, talking about issues where they have found


themselves with their families, struggling with provisions for


mental health in between 18-24 years old and I pay tribute to Mind and


Southern health for the issues they have helped. One thing is the tier


system of not being sick and off shore where they are going. Kenny


Secretary of State please tell me he will focus on special dumb


specialism in this area because it is about finding the people to help


people in need. -- specialism. She is right on by the Council on


everything they need to do is look carefully at where the tier system


is not working as part of our work for the Green paper that the Prime


Minister and this morning because it is not acceptable for people to be


done and they are not second half to get the care that they urgently


need. -- not sick enough. All the we have announced an intention to


announce well fail if we don't get the recruitment and training of new


staff correct. With the commitment we are making Jadeja invest more in


mental health, there also has to come more strategic planning. --


making to invest more. On a temporary basis, money is being


given to distressed trusts but isn't there a more fundamental ticking


time bomb, which is the sustainability and translation plans


-- transformation plans, and can I draw him to something I said in


December about the north east London plan, which envisions a deficit of


?578 million by 2021 and which says that, on a normal business as usual


case of normal type productions and savings, there will still be a ?240


million gap. That means poorer services. There is no capital


provision for the closure of the King George Hospital A and its


repositioning at Queens Hospital. Can you would urgently because there


is going to be a massive crisis in my area unless urgent steps are


taken to get more resources? Well, I am happy to do that issue and, can I


take this opportunity to pay tribute to the staff of both Queens and King


George? Who have not only done very well over winter, but have also made


progress, great progress in terms of joining that around from special


measures. We are hopeful that it might come out of special measures


now at some stage during this year, but that they decision for the QC.


-- CQC. Kettering General Hospital which serves my constituency has a


big problem with delayed discharge. Whatever the issue is about money,


perhaps the problem with social care is the model. Would it not be a good


idea, Secretary of State, if there was genuine commitment from the


other side of the house to try and work together to find the social


care system for the future? -- a social care system. I think he is a


right to say that we need to have these discussions in a less


politically charged away because we need to find a solution that will


survive changes environment and will be fit for the long-term. What I


would also say to him is that I think we missed a trick when they


say this is primarily about finding, the cause we have huge variation in


provision. There are many local authorities where there are no delay


discharges of care, as discussed earlier. What doesn't happen enough


in the NHS and social care system is people living from best practice in


other parts of the country and that is what we need to change. The


Secretary of State has spoken a lot and today about unnecessary


admissions to A Can you tell on Deeside, as a result of chronic


malnutrition, have travelled under the Conservative governments and


whether that approach will change to tackling poverty in this country. --


Teesside. What I would say to her is the way you deal with those terrible


problems is by having a stronger economy that allows asked to support


people through difficult period in their life and what we have is one


of the strongest economies, and I think this year it'll be the


strongest economy in the G7 which allows us to do things like invest


in our health and social care system and it is this party that can


deliver that. Thank you. I've spoken to before about the staggering rise


of patients at A in Addenbrooke's in Cambridge and the Hospital can


bring to me this morning that they see 300 people a day. High levels of


the late answers of care. The impact of this was brought to me by a


constituent who told me that on Thursday last week, the facilities


are so overcrowded that an adjacent seminar room was pressed into use


weblogs were taken and where she was treated behind a makeshift curtain


reclining on a standard chair. All conditions to be treated in of all


conditions of which to work. The Secretary of State may say it's not


about funding, if it is not, wealthy country Cambridge, sit down with his


Conservative colleagues on the county council and tell them where


they are going wrong? First of all, I went to Addenbrooke's in the


autumn and I saw first-hand just how hard the gap are working there.


That's another trust that is on special measures that has made huge


progress in trying to turn things around. I met a number any emergency


department as well and I beg of you any emergency department as well and


I couldn't do them for their very hard work. I've never said it's not


about funding. What I say is that it's not just about funding. There


is huge variation and what we see is part of the country where they


avoid, in their and agency departments, precisely the type of


overcrowding he spoke about Addenbrooke's. Hospitals that do so


very successfully, like Luton and Dunstable, for example. We need


hospitals to adopt the best practice. Thank you. Can I welcome


the public vocation of the new suicide prevention strategy and that


self harm is included in it. Thank you for the work on suicide


prevention, which I chair. Can I as the Secretary of State to meet with


Robert Colgate? Robert Colgate has set out a triage in mental health


systems. That means people don't have too wait 6-9 months to see a


consultant. With the support of front line staffing, they get an


immediate triage assessment and assistance to help. Can I urgently


asking to meet with Doctor Colgate? His work is being peer-reviewed by


Manchester University, and have a look at how this can also... It is


being rolled out across England, but Cialis can help us tackle the


problems we have. I thank her for her work on the suicide prevention


agency but I am more than happy to meet Doctor Colgate and the purpose


of the refreshed suicide prevention strategy is to make sure that we


adopt best practice throughout the country. There are some areas of the


country doing a very, very good job in suicide prevention. Particularly


in telling the public they can make a difference to this, too. I am more


than happy to explore what more can be done. Thank you. The Secretary of


State rightly pays tribute to NHS staff, but the reality is that many


of our NHS workers are now at breaking point. They only continue


to perform their work with care and compassion in the light of, rather


than because of, any action taken by the Health Secretary. It is now time


for the secretary of state to act. What can literally get to invest


properly in our NHS staff and reverse the process of geese


killing, demoralisation and downgrading of our NHS staff, which


he has provided over since 2010. -- de-skilling. With respect to the


honourable lady, who lie no cares passionately about the NHS, and


often asks the question about it. We have now 11,400 more doctors in the


NHS than 2010 and 11,200 more nurses. We protected the NHS budget


in 2010 when her party wanted to cut it. We promised ?5.5 billion more


than her party web adverts to promise for the NHS at the last


election. I think the characterisation she gives this


Government as not being prepared to back NHS staff is absurd. -- were


prepared to promise. Thank you. The primer Minister's focus on mental


health today is very welcome, but does he accept that we will only


achieve power of esteem when they except how far we are from at


present? This is not a recent problem. The lack of recognition for


mental health date back to the inception of the National Health


Service as it is driven by our culture and choices as a country,


rather than any particular Government. Darcy except that, even


the measures laid out today, which each of themselves are welcome, will


only really provide a fitting that the onto the problem and that, as it


stands, we will be looking at progress of waging in decades before


we achieve clarity of mental health conditions? Plaster. I thank him for


his interest in the issue and there is a challenge because, when we


legislate for clarity of cross-party support in 2012, there is a danger


that a concept like that can be nebulous and that is why we asked


Paul Farmer, who is the chief executive of Mind, to independently


look at what they fear, reasonable progress by 2020 and he came back


and he said he thought it would be a ten year process to get there. But


this was the right ambition for 2020, and it was his report that the


prime ministers except that this morning. We are making progress


against benchmarks that independent people have looked at, but it is


right to say that we will not get there by 2020 one and he must make


sure they do deliver on that commitment wildly as I are both MPs.


Very seriously mentally ill people rely on support from a range of


services, mental health services but also housing, social services,


sometimes the criminal justice system and family support services.


Can I ask the Secretary of State what is being done to ensure a whole


Government strategy to raise the standard of care, particularly for a


very severely ill people who need protection from harm both to


themselves and sometimes sadly to others in society? She is right. I


will give her one example which is particularly true and that is an


addiction services. Highly vulnerable people we are trying to


help get off a drugs habit, also have a housing problem a debt


problem, they may have a work problems. As you solve those


problems holistically you are unlikely to be able to address the


health problem that sits at the heart of those challenges. That is,


trying to address, more joined up trying to address, more joined up


integrated services but I am happy to have further discussions with her


as to how we can make more progress. The Secretary of State in his


statement has promised a Green paper on children and young people's


year. That could be 11 and a half year. That could be 11 and a half


months away. One in four people have a mental health disorder and the


Government's own research says young people are disproportionately


affected. We have heard stories including in my constituency of


young people waiting over a year for support, including those victims of


domestic violence, schools and parents are picking up the pieces.


Young people deserve better. Well he clarify the reasons for what appears


to be quite a long delay? Will he commit to bringing forward the Green


paper earlier so that action can be taken more quickly and that this


pressing issue is not kicked into long grass? Can I reassure her that


we wouldn't be taking the issue into the long grass if we have a Prime


Minister making a statement that we are going to have a green paper.


There is a specific reason why we need a bit of time, which is because


we want to make sure the changes that we make... We are getting a


little bit of chuntering on the front bench. Don't they want to


listen to the answer? The reason why we need to take some time is because


we have a number of pilots happening in schools at the moment concerning


improving mental health provision for people at the schools and we


want to see those pilots through and evaluate them and allowed that to


inform what we do in the Green inform what we do in the Green


paper. That will take a little bit of time. What we will get at the end


of it is the best evidence as to the right way forward. Mr Speaker, young


people in Sheffield have for some time now been telling me that the


awaiting 25 weeks for an appointment after a referral. Headteachers are


telling me the aye digging into their badges to buy in support for


pupils in crisis because they cannot access NHS services. Isn't it deeply


-- deeply cynical for the Prime Minister be raising hopes of


tackling the mental health crisis for our young people when the


measures he has announced fall desperately short and the money


falls short of what we need? It would be cynical if you raised hopes


and had no intention of doing anything about it. But what she has


said this morning in his speech was that this is the start of a process.


She pointed to those problems and She pointed to those problems and


she said we're going to have a green paper to look at how we deal with


those problems in detail. That does take some time. We will get to


position I hope one we can with those problems. In Sheffield, he is


lucky to have that Professor working in Sheffield who is the NHS lead


mental health psychiatrist and a specialist in homelessness and he


was very much helping us to shape the strategy. I am grateful to the


Secretary of State and colleagues across the House. Have you been


informed of any intentions Secretary of State of Northern Ireland to make


a statement to the for the wreckage -- resignation of the Deputy Prime


Minister? The short and to the honourable gentleman is that I have


not received any indication -- answer of an impending statement by


the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on the matter to which the


honourable gentleman refers. I appreciate it will of course be of


great interest to many members of the house and the fairest thing I


can say is that we must await the development of events. I am


conscious that there is a Wes Minster whole debate tomorrow


afternoon -- Westminster. The possibility of an oral statement by


the Government must clearly exist. And on the same matter, I think,...


My right honourable friend, over the last of weeks in Northern Ireland,


we have witnessed continuing political instability that was


immense proportions in relation to immense proportions in relation to


the renewable heat initiative and the renewable heat initiative and


the continuing failure of the First Minister to step aside while such an


investigation which my party had called for took place. As a


consequence, we see the Deputy First Minister resigned today, which means


the house of cards falls. As a consequence of that, Mr Speaker,


what other avenues are available to honourable members in this House to


discuss this particular political instability and this difficulty,


further assembly elections or new further assembly elections or new


extremely sensitive situation and I extremely sensitive situation and I


don't want to see anything. That adds to that sensitivity. The


honourable lady enquired as to what honourable lady enquired as to what


other avenues are open to ensure a discussion of this matter. In the


using the word other, I assume she is referring to other avenues beyond


the possibility of a Government statement, which of course it would


be for the Government to decide whether to make. The honourable lady


is well familiar with the mechanisms available for scrutiny of the


the fairest thing I can say is that the fairest thing I can say is that


I would be extremely surprised if this matter were not fully aired in


the next few days in this chamber. As a speaker, I would want to


facilitate the House if that is what is desired. My sense is that it will


be. Desired. And that it will happen. On a separate matter, a


point of order. Mr Speaker, many will be alarmed by the recent


reports of attempts by foreign Government to take down members of


this House, including a senior minister. Given the very serious


implications of this, what measures will you take to investigate this,


not least as one party to the discussions, according to the press


conference, was or is at least partially a paid employee of this


House? The honourable gentleman, I thank you for your point of order


and indeed for notice of it. At this stage, in direct response to the


enquiry by the Right honourable gentleman, I am not aware of


anything which has happened is that is a matter for the chair. If it


transpires that something has happened which is a matter for the


chair, I will of course consider what action to take. The matter


concerned is of course serious. I do not dispute that for one moment. It


is, however, important to be accurate in the use of terms and


language. To the best of my knowledge and belief, and I don't


doubt the good intentions of the right honourable gentleman, the


individual to whom he has indirectly referred has not been an employee of


this hack House. The individual concerned was an employee of a


number of institutions and people. My understanding is that she has


resigned from one, I think, full-time post and from another


part-time post. The part-time post which has caused her to work


administratively with a member of the House, that part-time post has


ended and the path that was available to the individual is being


returned. I think that's a pretty full answer to the right honourable


gentleman, which is intended to be, and I hope it is helpful. I don't


think it will be helpful further to dwell upon the matter now. If there


thank the right honourable gentleman thank the right honourable gentleman


for raising the matter which is oppositely of concern to him, I


don't want to invite trouble. The right honourable gentleman is a very


senior member of the House and I knew he wouldn't take liberties. He


is looking in a state of great perturbation. If he wants to be the


point of order, I would stop him. He doesn't. What a remarkable display


of self restraint by the right honourable gentleman. It might catch


on, you never know. I think colleagues would probably say to me,


good luck with that one. If there are no further points of order, we


come late to the main business. We can now proceed to be the orders of


the day. Technical and Further Education Bill, as amended in the


public bill committee to be considered. Thank you. We begin with


new clause one Wes Witcher will be convenient to consider the other new


clauses on the paper. To move, I call the Shadow minister responsible


for these important matters. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Speaker and


can I on behalf of everybody in the chamber wish you and all your


officials and the Deputy speakers and the person taking your place as


I speak a very happy New Year and the same to members of this House.


The issue before us this evening which we will be pursuing is whether


it will be a happy New Year for apprentices and for the new


Institute for apprenticeship and technical education. Madam Deputy


Speaker, the Government will no we have been broadly supportive,


broadly supportive of the process that they are bringing forward,


albeit it was somewhat forced upon them when their original mechanism,


which was to get many of these things through the academy 's bill,


hit a shipwreck because the Academy 's bill marked -- was not too


popular with. We got fairly rapid notice. That said, we had a good


committee stage and I want to pay tribute to the Minister for his


reconstructive way in which he reconstructive way in which he


responded to rest in committing. There is an old saying that fine


words but no parsnips but I hooked words but no parsnips but I hooked


by the end of the season -- this evening, I hope we have a view


parsnips. A film you'll possibly for those of the vegetarian instinct.


During the committee stage he and others moved in number of amendments


which don't appear to have been taken on by the Government. We had


hoped the Government would bring forward some of those amendments in


their own form. I'm always slightly disappointed when intimations of


progress at committee stage I not then met with specifics. The


Government has the opportunity this evening on commenting on our


amendments to do something about it. Indeed, to accept in principle some


of our amendments. If they think they are defective but the basic


principle of them is fine then they should take them on board. I want to


move may to this amendment we have move may to this amendment we have


put down and to start actually with one amendment with one new clause,


new clause one, which we moved at committee stage and which I think


remains valid. That is that this House should actually have an annual


report on the quality outcomes of completed apprenticeships. We've had


many discussions and argument in this place about the issue of


apprenticeships. Much emphasis has been put on apprenticeship starts


but far less emphasis, I don't make a party political point here,


generally speaking, far emphasis on generally speaking, far emphasis on


the process of completion. Those familiar with the famous saying it


is not the beginning of a thing with the continuing of it until it is


fully finished which holds the full glory will know therefore why we


think it is really important to pit and this is not simply an input, not


even an outfit but also an outcome. In broad terms, we have supported


the major expansion of apprenticeship starts although the


Government remains responsible for the target of 3 million starts by


2020 whipped on previous occasions have come about by a rather curious


set of circumstances. The Minister has rightly said previously that


bridging the growing skills gap. The bridging the growing skills gap. The


potential expansion might feel some of the courts needed to fill the


gaps. This new clause is timely, given the sort of things, an


exhaustive list, we believe would demonstrate those outcomes. Despite


some progress in recent years, the some progress in recent years, the


situation of young people not in employment, education and training


remains fragile. The most recent official figures do show an increase


in the low of 16 to 24-year-olds classified as economically inactive.


As I have said grievously, they continue to the sector skills


people, universities, have questioned marks about the quality


of what those 3 million a year apprenticeships will be. Young


people are concerned about them and people are concerned about them and


concerned they should be of quality. The level of satisfaction has been


high and showed no change from previous years but it is extremely


important that we monitor satisfaction rates. In that process,


we have to be watchful of the fragility of apprenticeships and


those have fallen. -- apprenticeship success rates. They have fallen to


71.7% in 2015. It is important to look at the evaluation budget in


2015 in this area. It is a modest fall in the proportion of how


apprenticeships make up formal training to 79%. But it is a warning


sign for the Government and that is why we believe that, now we've got


those new standards for technical education, it is vital to track the


outcomes for each group. Last year's apprenticeship evaluation showed a


slight increase in the proportion of people completing apprenticeships


but we need to also add particular areas where there have been higher


levels of unemployment among completed apprenticeships. That


includes eye CG, it includes arts and media, which had 11%


unemployment. -- ICT. Those have to be looked at as the be getting


positive response from the Government. I moved onto new clause


two. This amendment has two separate issues. The first is to build on the


Minister's ashore during the committee stage. That apprenticeship


panel would be set up to reports directly to the board and to ensure


that a similarity and takes place when the Institute absolves


technical education into its remit in 2018. -- absorbs. I had to say


how happy I've been following the belatedly to the conservation


document for guidance, which we were originally promised in the evidence


session by the Delano, the shadow chief executive, would there before


Christmas. -- Peter Lautner. The minister like to tell us at some


point why they didn't emerge before Christmas. He did say, and I thank


him for this, that I think we can square the circle by agreeing that


the institute should draw on the experience of apprenticeships, so


I'm pleased to announce we expect the Institute is to invite


apprentices to establish an apprentices panel, which would be


brought directly to the board. That panel would be made of apprentices


from different off-peak evasions and experiences, it would decide for


itself. -- occupations. I'm quoting from the Minister what he said from


the committee stage, the Institute will ensure the third panel is in


place before the Institute goes live in April 20 17. The institute will


consider how best to engage with apprenticeships on an ongoing basis


and how best to represent technical education should students --


students as of 2018. Anyone reading the Hansard that would have gone to


the inclusion, as I did, that this was a very welcome the set of


concessions from the Minister and strong assurances, we thought, that


a panel would be set up before April. However, when we have gone


through the finer detail of the belated consultation document, we


find a paragraph which uses the words, but perhaps, perhaps there


would be the set of an apprenticeship panel which reported


directly to the Institute board to ensure that apprentices have the


opportunity to have their say about education and training. They can


still improve the experience of those thereafter. Apps, Mr Deputy


Speaker, you are a student of the English-language, as I'm sure most


of the snow, is a lot weaker than the assurance. -- perhaps. As -- as


most of us know. The assurance that a panel will be set up before April.


The Minister also said during committee, as I said, about the


Institute needing to get how best to represent technical education June


and of those taking responsibly in 2018. Surely logical step to date is


to establish a similar pattern for technical education shouldn't that


are not undertaken apprenticeships. -- panel. Hopefully that panel will


not be prefaced by the word perhaps. It's important that the experience


and feedback help guide the new institute, particularly at the time


frame involved and the capacities of the resources of the Institute are


so limited. I want to come back to what we have said previously and


unity, and I want to make the comparison between what is going on


in this Bill, as to what went on in the eight G delve. If whatever


structure the DfEE ever says. -- AG Bill forgetting apprentices and


technical education dude and is seen to be inferior to not even done in


the same way as the University's Minister made concessions on the HE


Bill bell, then students in FE might think they are being treated as


second citizens. -- HE Bill. I want to seek assurance that this panel


will be set up before April and taking on board the war that we have


boots tonight, and it is not able to accept it tonight, make sure that it


goes on the face of the Bell in another place. I want to move on


now, Madam Deputy Seagate, to our new clause four, which would place a


statutory requirement to produce a strategy on career education. Now,


now one could fall, and I'm certainly not going to, no one could


pull the Minister on his enthusiasm verbally to get to grips with this


subject. It was one of the best thing that he said when he was


appointed and can any regular columns that he is now been having


in FE Week, he has continued to elude to this, that we need to


actually have a very strong strategy and very rapidly. That is because


the rhetoric on career advice spell does not match the wilful reality


facing young people. -- still does not. The Minister is here today and


I have seen, and they had he has also seen, the very disturbing


report from the Princes trust, which is just been released, which shows


the self-confidence of young people about their future and at its lowest


in eight years. That, and a whole range of issues cited in respect of


that, and I'm not going to stray from the amendment but specifically


advise and the state of jobs and careers are included in what is said


in this report. So, when the Minister said, in his New Year


article, for FE Week, that's 2017 is about making sure the gap right


guidance is on offer for technical education and location, and


apprenticeships, as much as it does University, reject him at his word


and the new clause four that we have in place tonight, is to give a


structure and a framework to what the Minister is saying. Now, I go


back to what I said two members of the governing on the HE Bill when we


were gelled that, I can assure you I will take this on board, this, that


and the other. -- told. But you know as well as I do that we are


legislating not just for one Minister of War one parliament,


possibly, but with something like further education -- Minister or for


one. But we appreciate you can in this area, but we would like to see


the duty to publish the strategy or the face of the bill. There is a


how's the providers, as he knows of employers, and employer's


organisations who have queued up with his department. -- employers'


organisations. To deal them help with the baby Government has dealt


with careers in the past. That is when why I said when a state to him


in the past, that they needed to promote strong career guidance, and


I also referred to the cross-party verdict from the two select


committee chairs on this matter. The Minister, I think, felt slightly


aggrieved at this, but the truth of the matter is, if we are going to


make a success of the Institute, we have to have these sort of thing


boot on the face of the deal. There has to be a mechanism -- put. For


whatever party and whatever governments over the next period of


time for which this bill is advised to work. I well. I thank the


honourable member for giving way and I know he feels passionately about


this subject, but does he not also agree with the bank that the


Government has an overarching approach to careers advice? It could


be difficult bridging arrangement into this particular bill that only


apply to technical education when there is a much broader issue at


stake, which the Government is tackling at a strategic level. I


care what the honourable gentleman at least they and it is true, of


course, but again, as with the discussion we are having at... Are


available to have this evening, career education... At 16, nor at


the remit of the DfEE in this particular bill. It start much


earlier. -- HE Bill. If that is an ardent for doing nothing with any


limited area of this Bill, I don't agree. We have to do something with


that and I would like to see erupting structure he is talking


about but, unfortunately, I would be quite happy at the moment just to


see a limited erupting structure for the area we are discussing this


evening. -- overarching. Two. About the ?90 million allocated for career


enterprise companies over this, we need to see that how it is


distributed and if Accu wrote. -- to talk about. By the Institute. --


accurate. There was an very damning statistics. The proportion of


respondents that the Minister knows saying their advice was very poor


poor has remained high across all of the sexes. -- sectors. It's rather


worryingly went on to say that 94 survey respondents were not able to


receive any guidance at all. When we discuss this matter in committee,


those are the sort of statistics that we have available. And I said,


perfectly verbally, I thought, that alone the careers and enterprise


company were beginning to make progress. -- fairly. That I didn't


agree that, because they are heavily relied on volunteers, that they were


yet able to give the coverage and necessary. In December, early, in


December, we learned that the US and enterprise company does not cater to


every college around the country, including the hell of London. --


carriers. -- Hall of London. There are cold areas at the moment. --


whole. A lot of areas are not covered and London is completely


absent. Claudia Harris of the honourable gentleman confirmed that


the company did not like that any of the capital's CEC colleges. She


landed the lack of college on ramp-up. Ramp-up is what lesser


mortals would call the rolling out of pilots. I await a definition from


the Minister on that point. I'm not playing the blame for this at the


door for the careers and enterprise company I believe that the


Government are expecting them to do too much with too little, and I also


agree that, to have a company that is so heavily reliant on volunteers,


to carry out these that Basques, is actually probably something that the


Government have to think about and would again at. -- tasks. She, as I


said, then there would be an expansion of this to all schools


over the coming year, and that is fine. But where are the budget


implications for this? Is the Minister working on the Chancellor


already on a substantial high in the budget for the finding in this area?


Because he will certainly need it if he's going to address the issues


that we are talking about in this new clause.


There was a report in the middle of December which shoot the pure


quality of careers advice was limiting young people's choices.


Research carried out by the Institute for employment research at


the University of Warwick and commissioned by the foundation found


that only 1%, only 1%, of students had viewed careers advice at the


most important influence to stay on in further education. Over half of


them have said they wanted more information from employers. In the


New Year, the Minister New Year article, keep it priority on this. I


am taking him at his word. If these are indeed be Minister's aim, this


amendment, this clause which sets out fairly comprehensively how this


process would operate and if there are technical deficiencies in it or


practical deficiencies in it or drop Winship, we are welcome to your


suggestion, this amendment, new clause, is exactly what he needs to


make his rhetoric a reality. There is another saying that if wishes


were horses, beggars would ride. Maybe the Minister should get on and


accept what we say, otherwise he will remain a beggar come the budget


and we'll be looking for a scrap at the Chancellor's table. The other


thing, while blue on the subject of careers, one of the other things the


Minister used an earlier in the year at the Tory party conference, which


again we applaud and leave the previous Education Secretary had


made some announcements about it, plans to allow schools to give


people vocational academic route when providing careers advice, we


are told by the Times educational supplement was told, that's now been


put on ice as well. I would welcome some response from the Minister in


those areas. If I move on now to some of our other amendments,


particularly I want to just speak briefly to amendment format, which


is making sure that the Institute must have regard to the need to


promote equality of opportunity to pardon dissipate in widening access


and participation. The Minister and I agree that this bill at present a


real opportunity to reform an neglected vocational pathways and


support both 16 institutions. Presently, there are too few


students from disadvantaged backgrounds transitioning from level


to to higher levels of study. This means thousands of young people are


not realising their potential. High-quality technical education and


work -based training must act as a vehicle for social mobility and we


believe that by giving the Institute this obligation, it will help focus


it on changing that staters call. Presently, the Government does not


publish data, I stand to be corrected here, my belief that


Government does not publish data on the social background of apprentices


and that means it is difficult to assess just how many people from


disadvantaged backgrounds are starting and completing them.


However, we do note that recent research published by the social


mobility commission found that nationally young people eligible for


free school meals I have is likely to start and complete an


apprenticeship as there are better off peers. Just under 50% of


students in that capacity team and a or C GCSE in English or maths by 19


as opposed to 74% of the better off peers. That means they lack the


grades to in rule on the level three pathways. There are also figures


that show that only 36% of them achieve a level three qualification


and that's compared with 61% of their better off peers. That shows


the importance of the transition year which is proposed in the


proposed 16 year skill plan. If that doesn't happen are doesn't happen


well, we will see a bigger gap, wider access to the new technical


routes and that will prevent them from being an effective vehicle for


social mobility. Why didn't participation amendment is


an increasing focus on widening an increasing focus on widening


participation and funding in 27 -- investing 33 million in wider


participation. Further education including apprenticeships deserve


the same sort of attention and scrutiny and the Institute must be


required annually to measure and report on the gap between


disadvantaged young people and their disadvantaged young people and their


peers accessing and progressing from technical pathways. I wasn't so


aware, Madam Deputy Speaker, happy aware, Madam Deputy Speaker, happy


New Year to you as well. If I wasn't so aware of the woeful inadequacy of


these staffing proposals at the moment by the Institute, I might


suggest the Government might take a leaf out of HEA and have an offer


for HD students. We are not asking for that tonight. What we are asking


for is an appreciation of the fact that there needs to be that


particular focus for the Institute. I also want to couple it. We've


talked a lot in this chamber in the last year about the timescale for


delivering this 3 million target. I also want to talk briefly to


amendment five. Amendment five says that the Institute should and must


cooperate with the apprenticeship delivery board on a progression into


and delivery of apprenticeships. Now, at the terms of reference for


that delivery board were originally to have a board cheered by the


chairman of the apprenticeship Ambassador network and the Prime


Minister's adviser on apprenticeships to provide support


across all areas to ensure the Government's ambition of it using 3


million programmes by 2020. It talked about the purpose to


implement employment engagement strategy, increase the number of


apprenticeships, secured new employment and engagement. It


sounded great. But when you delves into the delivery of the board, a


little further, it's not quite as it seems. First of all, the terms of


reference of it being shared by the Prime Minister's advisers on


apprenticeship. The Government could share, the honourable member for


Stratford-upon-Avon was stood down last autumn and that left only the


previous private sector chair of the board as its sole chair. People are


going to ask- where is the Government's adviser on


apprenticeships now? How about the rest of this committee? When this


Minister sang the praises the Minister sang the praises the


apprenticeship delivery board but I do have to tell him there were also


somewhat underwhelming so far. It was actually made up of members


remain narrowly section of business. It only had one woman in its number.


There was no rule for others, such as universities, trade unions and


local authorities. There has been, to be fair, some progress with the


number of women on the ADP and it's now got three. It's important those


lessons are taken on board the Institute. When the board was


announced, it was advertised as being a key part of the process. It


wasn't simply there to be a bully pulpit but what a direct an active


role. I question the Minister on that in committee and he responded,


I can reassure the honourable gentleman the apprenticeship


delivery board is in full flow. I meet with its chairman regularly and


goes up and down the country and works with businesses to encourage


them to employ apprentices, much of our success has been because of that


board's incredible work. Yet, I do have to tell the Minister that when


I've looked at the minutes of that board, and we have examined the


minutes, I don't quite get the same sense of achievement. Because what


the minutes shill over the summer period is a couple of employees from


large employers telling each other about random conversations and


meetings they have applied they have. With the occasional


presentation from the skills funding agency about their marketing plans.


There seems to have been very little coordinated action taken over the


summer months and it's quite clear to meet the delivery board is not


currently fulfilling that role. That is why we have put this amendment


down. The Institute for apprenticeships and technical


education does not have the resources are capacity to be taking


on these responsibilities will stop their focus is supposed to be on


developing standards. We know from the shadow chief executive that


staffing levels and finance are staffing levels and finance are


going to be limited, 60 rising to 100 possible when the technical


educational elements kick in. We have a very short space of time


between now and April start. I should have mentioned, Madam Deputy


Speaker, a princely budget of ?8 million a year on which the


Institute is supposed to be initially operating. There has to be


more focus on marketing. The delivery board is not just a trade


fair as these minutes suggest, it is meant to help develop and increase


the number of pensions. It must cooperate with the Institute to


succeed. It is vitally important now that the Government has strapped any


involvement they had and visibly forgotten about apprenticeships. I


want also to tut on another issue which we have moved an amendment on


tonight and that is to try and get some clarity and keep its focus on


the Government actually delivering money that will be additional or a


substitute for additional Government funding. The Government was already


spending ?1.5 billion on apprenticeships in 2016 and we are


told the levy is expected to raise ?2.9 billion by 2020 of which the


latest count, Madam Deputy Speaker, ?2.4 million will be spent in


England. So, where does the additional money go? Last year I


submitted a written question to the land skills Minister on this. I got


a sort of response saying that by 2019 two 2020, we expect to


2.5 billion on apprenticeships in 2.5 billion on apprenticeships in


England. My maths told me that if ?2.5 billion is raised from the


sector, and the Government is beating currently ?1.5 billion, that


means an extra billion pounds, which is what the Minister's reply says. I


come back to the point which we raised earlier last year- what's


going to happen to the remaining 1.5 billion raised? Is it going to be


40% for apprenticeships and 60% going straight back to the Treasury?


The challenge remains for this Government to convince employers and


stakeholders that this remains a stakeholders that this remains a


genuinely long-term funding commitment for apprenticeships and


not just something that becomes regarded as a Treasury payroll tax.


I'm grateful. I apologise for interrupting his magnificent speech.


problem of the pension levy is that problem of the pension levy is that


the Government is all over the place on it. When I talked to a major


supermarket chain, they said they have employees in Scotland, their


payroll is be sufficient magnitude, they will have to do the


apprenticeship levy but because of devolution, there is no guarantee


that supermarket chain's apprenticeship levy funding will in


fact in Scotland be used for fact in Scotland be used for


apprenticeships. That may be the apprenticeships. That may be the


case in Wales and Northern Ireland as well, I know not. That may go


some way to explaining the gap that my friend has put his finger on very


acutely as to where is the money going? It's because it's a mess


between the Treasury who haven't come to grips with devolution yet.


My honourable friend makes it very interesting and distinct points.


Again, if I wasn't constrained by talking about this particular


amendment, we would have some very interesting conversations about how


the devolution situation is happening. I need to stick to my


point out. The other point I would make, which is central to this


amendment, is what I just referred to the Minister in respect of the


coming budget. We now know that the budget I think, Madam Deputy


Speaker, is to be in the first week of March. Issues as to what the


rates and the threshold of the apprenticeship levy might be after


its first year of as we going to come to mind. The former Chief


Secretary to the Treasury after much prompting and questioning under the


previous Administration of David Cameron has said, quote, the


Government will keep the pension levy under review and I think all of


us know that means it can go up, theoretically it could go down. That


apprenticeship levy and the level which it is set and how much


companies get back from it will be crucial in deciding whether it's a


success or a flop. What conversation has the Minister had with the


Treasury? It's only eight weeks away, I dread to tell you, to the


budget day. To make sure that they budget day. To make sure that they


get the balance right. The more we hear, I said this in me and I shall


say it again here today, the more we hear about how the levy will now


need to fund the devolved administrations, English and maths


at levels two, incentive payments and non-levy payers, the more it


seems inevitable that this Government will end up raising the


levy. The and all the slightly more


technical amendments. -- I want now to deal with. The first is designed


to deal with the situation for privately funded and ASBO


qualifications is clarified. -- and this bloke. Without clarification,


there is a danger that the technical qualifications, we are told, that


professional accreditation skills they further solely by employers. --


schemes. We do not believe it is the intention of the current to include


this but we want clarification. Yes, I will. I am grateful. I happy say,


I'm slightly bemused by this amendment. I think I understand it


but, when I come to this topic, it seems it would be desirable in


England, if not in the United Kingdom, to have a professional


framework of standards. Not simply that framework applying to


qualifications, which were obtained through a state funded institution.


Were expressed more brightly than that, on the face of it, it does


seem desirable to me. Perhaps my honourable friend to say more about


his approach to this. My honourable friend is quite right to raise that


particular issue in terms of the national framework. There has been


research reports over many years which indicate that the privately


funded trading market has been exceedingly publicly funded one by


considerable that includes specialist management training,


project and programme management. I do think this is an area where the


element perhaps needs to a little more carefully at how this process


is going to move, but I absolutely agree with him about the need to


have an overarching national framework in which we don't have the


moment. Moving on, if I can move amendment eight, which would ensure


the mapping of occupation groups, with particular regard for people


aged 16 to 24, this is crucial because many apprenticeship training


providers are reporting that, under the new levy system, employers are


deciding to choose apprentices aged over 19, rather than 16-18 year


olds, particularly when it comes to the new standards where, they say,


there is very little incentive for employers to take on younger


learners, especially in the higher funding bands, where ?1000 bonus is


available. As the Minister will know, it has predominantly been


delivered up to now, apprenticeships for 16-18 -year-olds are seeing


their majority of business switch to older individuals. Now, if you


look... If one looks at the Sainsbury's comments, the changes in


funding. -- award Sainsbury. Apprentices in the same band have


little effort to change that. Maybe that is the current's plan. If it is


so, the current have to be honest and tell us. If not, something has


to do the changed. Otherwise, we are in danger of ending up with fewer


apprenticeship opportunities for 16-18 year olds. I would quote to


the Minister the remarks of JTL recently, a training provider, who


say that under the new system, and lawyers say they would do and why


younger people aged 19 and older when they traditional age


differentials are removed. 16 and 17-year-olds, sometimes, are not our


on-site due to safety rules and some not having driving licence. It still


makes it worthwhile to take them on presently, but removing the new --


and letting the new guidelines would make it difficult to do so. It was


thoughtfully given the emphasis that the so-called ?1000 incentive for


employers to recruit 16-18 year olds simply doesn't work for the Stem


sectors. I'm quoting again from JTL that the apprenticeship normally


lasts for years, upgrading to ?5 per week, which is of no interest to


employers. It is a timely reminder, a timely new rear area reminder to


the Minister -- New Year reminder, of these apprenticeship campaigns


that some parties are pleased to be involved with, a very broad range of


people were met, changes were promised but they haven't solved the


problem. They have applied and temporarily sticking plaster to it


and how long it will stick remains to be seen. Coming on top of the


continued lack of certainty about apprenticeships and the delay


consultation, there must be concerned about the fragility of the


Government's performance in the 16-18 area. Areas like Blackpool,


where we want to see the skilled apprenticeships now. It has also


been raised, I'm sure the Minister knows, the issue that a framework of


only 15 groups across technical education... Denying many young


people workplace roots of level two or three. We remain concerned about


that, given that so many young people in the service sector are not


like the GB covered by this. -- likely. This has been said -- likely


to be covered by this. Whether it is about technical education or


apprenticeships, young people in Blackpool and everywhere else needs


good training, whether it comes from the service sector on the


manufacturing sector. I would have thought that would have been made to


group focus on that, that would make a huge contribution to the social


justice agenda and even, arguably, to anticipate they impact of Brexit.


It is important there is a skill strategy which is inclusive and,


this is a perfect opportunity to create a coherent and inclusive


strategy that covers a wide range of different abilities, attitude and


striving for excellence, and that is what the intention of amendment


eight is there to do. I want, briefly, to talk to amendment nine,


which talked about all apprenticeship standards, including


recognised technical qualification. The Minister well-known that it's


not something we have been concerned about, a range of committees and


governors recently, again, a LP, have been concerned about this. .


Investment in time and measles is leading again to employability and,


in some areas, the lack of engagement. According to just 30% of


the current standard release, still don't have a mandatory column,


convocation included. -- qualification included. This would


be to make the whole apprenticeship a recognised qualification rather


than looking at its components. I want to move to amendment ten and


two group into it comments for 11-16 and indeed 18-21. Amendment ten on


page six talk about the need to change between the title of


documents to standard or technical design specifications. This is


intended to ensure that only copyright is required at a level to


acquit apprenticeships, regarding design specifications, which are the


equivalent of assessment plans, are all, it is argued, ground for


copyright. The Inquisition of acquired copyright, and this is


something that city and Guilds have specifically raised in evidence with


ourselves, other groups have as well, if the amendment come forward


because there is a concern that imposing acquired copyright is one


of the most significant risks to the future vitality of technical


education in the UK. I accept this is a complex and technical area, but


I do believe the Minister has to look carefully at it. I don't


believe it is simply a question of assisting providers wanting to set


in Stone a fall of protectionism. It is about intellectual property and


where intellectual property starts and ends. The concerns of many


providers is that there has been a degree of mission creep in the way


the bill has been drafted. I do have to say, from a pragmatic point of


view, is that broader definition of what the institute have to do in


terms of copyright, which is the existing one in the bill, remains.


That may require even more reason losses to police in UAE that advise


have already mentioned, lacking support. -- in the way. There is, I


say, are the important issue that we need to look at. I would like to


also make the point that the concern that each technical level will only


have one awarding organisation, something that has been raised by


about the Centre for study, market reform of education and the NCSC and


the NCS said, we believe -- NCFE. Only one of these going to one


awarding organisation would provide... Would... To have one with


the unfortunate, to quote Oscar Wilde, to have two would be


beneficial because it would provide competition and we could switch


quickly without having the multiplication issues that have


caused problems and difficulties elsewhere. The NCFE cassettes, I


think more in sorrow than anger, that the current proposals do not


seek to provide the great expertise in designing and assessing


professional and technical education provocations that already exist


within awarding organisations. Turning, if I may, to our amendments


11-16 to the bill, these are designed, again, to be consequential


on the amendments in amendments nine. Under an exclusive licensing


model, a licence holder for a particular qualification may assume


a qualified model pollack position for the duration, that is one of the


reasons why these are designed to move away from that principle. --


monopolic. The principle, it seems, to ask is that there is a


rationalisation in rewarding operations. Not necessarily the


point of single operators on a licence and what this could do to a


monopoly at the single point of failure alongside all the IPR and


Crown copyright issues. I repeat, this is a concentrated area and they


appreciate that getting the balance right is not easy but I do urge him


to think very carefully about some of the representations that have


been made and again, if we cannot do anything about them tonight, then at


least two bring them forward in terms of the other place. The final


area which I want to comment on... Briefly... I've talked about the


roots and the rest of it, is the amendment and that the GAA because


the amendments would ensure that the GAA would be in the about to share


information. Information. QAA. And that degree of apprenticeships would


be fully covered by this requirement. Ofsted should have the


authority do respect every apprenticeship. While the Wellcome


the growth and expects more under the levy, some are not genuinely


work -based learning and are closer to buy degrees. -- we welcome.


Stricter monitoring is needed so we argue that is the involvement of the


QAA is really necessary in this. Apprenticeships have to be just


that, proper apprenticeships and things that Ofsted have to be


engaged with. I am aware that there amendments have had to be discussed


in some considerable detail and some of them are technical, but the broad


thrust of we are trying to do is to urge the governments, firstly, to


act on its commitments and she go further and make some of the


rhetoric around social mobility and widening, and participation, a


reality. The only way to do that is to improve the bill with the sort of


amendments that we have brought forward this evening.


The question is that new clause one B read a second time.


Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. This is the first time a microphone


appreciate it. Can I first wish my appreciate it. Can I first wish my


honourable friend and the House a happy New Year and also to all the


Christmas and throughout the New Christmas and throughout the New


Year as well. Can I thank you Madam Deputy Speaker for introducing the


debate and I am grateful for the honourable member for Blackpool


South for his amendment. As ever South for his amendment. As ever


very thoughtful. I will start by discussing the proposed new clause,


but I do want to just make the point that the honourable gentleman talked


about completion of apprenticeships 70% of apprentices complete, 90% get


employment or further training. We've got nearly 900,000 apprentices


at an all-time high, a record in our nation's history. I think we are


making good progress. He then talked about in the early part of his


remarks. He will know that between two present 14 and 2015, a


proportion of young adult increase to 90%, the highest on record. It


fell in 2014 to 6.5%. The lowest rate since records began. He talked


about the appointment and was going on yet again about Christmas. I have


to say to him that it's not just for Christmas, it's for life. We want to


get it right, we want to make sure that the appointments that we make


our the right ones and not to do them in haste. I think that the


honourable gentleman sometimes says we are doing things too quickly and


then on the other times he says we are doing things too slowly. Now, in


terms of new clause one, as I explained in the committee, the


institute will be required to report on its activities annually under


scheduled for the enterprise act and the report must be placed before


Parliament. That provision will also allow the Secretary of State to ask


the Institute report on anything else she thinks appropriate, such as


the information requested the amendment. We think it will be an


unnecessary and significant duplication of effort as this


information is already collected and published by the Secretary of State


apprenticeships. I have given him apprenticeships. I have given him


some of the figures a moment ago. Much of this information goes far


beyond the Institute. The ends digit's corporal from April 2017 is


to oversee and quality assured the development of standards and


assessment plans for use in delivering apprenticeships. Under


the reforms in the bill, college -based technical education cannot be


held wholly responsible. The job outcomes and wage rates for


apprentices once they complete their apprenticeships. It is essential


that the Institute is aware of the impact its making. We expected to


make good use of the data and the outcomes made available to


through these public data sources through these public data sources


and surveys. And to explain in its own report have it has deployed


them. I'm going to respond to new clause to proposed by the honourable


member. Of course. I am grateful to the Minister for the work he does.


He is very committed. Whenever I see him he is wearing the AA on his


lapel for his support for apprenticeship. Can you clarify one


point for me in relation to subsection two E which includes a


report on satisfaction rate of employers. The Minister will be


to reach the 3 million target there to reach the 3 million target there


will be dilation. I'm not saying there will be but there is concerned


there might be. Is the satisfaction rate of employers currently


collected, not every employer but through sampling and published,


because of it as it would be very important for it to be so that the


concerns about dilation of standards can be relieved. I thank him for his


comments. They are published and I think if I'm not mistaken it's near


90% in terms of employer satisfaction. I'm very happy to


provide him with information if you so requires. I agree with the


honourable member for Blackpool that the Institute does need to consider


the views of those who take an apprenticeship or a technical


education course and I'm confident it will do this. He will know and he


pointed out that we published draft strategic guidance for the Institute


last week. In this document that we now open for consultation, we set


out and expect the Institute to establish an apprentice panel that


will report directly to the board. I am pleased to say to the honourable


gentleman that it will be ready by April 2017. But I do want to make a


wider point that I'm not... I don't think we should rush things, we need


to get it right that apprentice panel will be made up of apprentices


from different occupations and experience. The apprentice panel


will decide for itself which issues to focus on and will challenge and


make recommendations to the board. I am sure it will be a success. It


will ensure that the views of apprentices are fed directly into


the Institute's covenants. But it might not be exactly the right model


in practice. I want to see how it works and I believe that the


Institute, particularly in its infancy, should have the flexibility


and freedom to decide the best way of gathering apprenticeship


ongoing basis. What ever model it ongoing basis. What ever model it


adopts, I would expect the Institute adopts, I would expect the Institute


of his and similar for technical education shouldn't when it takes on


this responsibility. I want to see how the apprentice panel pans out.


Thank you. I just want to be... Because of the implications of the


wording of the document, I want to be clear on this, is the Minister


giving an assurance on the floor of the House that the panel will be


setup for April? That he will review the progress of the panel on whether


and if he thinks it's not the right and if he thinks it's not the right


format of structure, that he will replace it with something that will


be equally valuable in representing the views of apprenticeships to the


board of the Institute? I am pleased to give the honourable gentleman


that guarantee. It will be set up by April. I believe that it would be


pointless to have an Institute of apprenticeships in Terrigal


education without proper apprenticeship reputation. But I do


want to see what is the best format and I'm sure it'll work. It will be


a success. I just want to see how it pans out, as I have said. And then


something similar for technical something similar for technical


education students. I agree the motivation of the amendment but I am


concerned about enshrining the establishment panels and


legislation. I don't want to pick the Institute and a constant


straitjacket of legislative red tape to reflect every good idea that


there may be to how best to fulfil its responsibility. That amendment


is unnecessary. It would undermine the Institute's power to regulate


its own governance and perform its duties. In terms of new clause four,


career strategy, the honourable lady made a remarkable speech in


about this as I do. I think that we about this as I do. I think that we


do have meat on the bones. It is not just words. The


talked about budgets. We are talked about budgets. We are


spending ?90 million. That is just an the work of the career centre,


there is a separate ?77 million being spent this year on national


careers service guidance. I am going further, looking at career strategy


from beginning to look at how we can make sure it addresses our skill


needs, how we can help the most disadvantaged, how we can ensure


there is widespread provision and quality provision and how it leads


to jobs and security. I will set out my plans on career is over the


coming weeks. But the investment in the careers enterprise company, he


seemed to suggest there was no activity in London. I've been myself


to a school in east London, supported by the careers enterprise


company and the local enterprise partnership doing remarkable work.


Some 1300 advisers are connecting schools and colleges. They are


looking and slowly creating a way to connect with 250,000 students in the


75% of the cold spots around the country. There is money for


mentoring as well. I think that the honourable gentleman talked about a


famine. There's not a feast that there is certainly substantive and


serious fans going into this. I could spend a lot of time listing


all the different monies and things that their art but I think he looks


at this carefully and fairly, he will see the work that the careers


enterprise company is doing. We will monitor carefully the impact of our


work, destination date will be included and the National


time in January 20 17. Ensuring an time in January 20 17. Ensuring an


even sharper focus on the success of schools and colleges in supporting


the students. We did legislate for my time to make sure that schools


gave independent careers advice in terms of skills and apprenticeships.


That was done by my predecessor. There is work being done in schools.


I welcome the thoughtfulness of the honourable member proposing the new


clause but it's my view because of the action we are taking, because of


the careers plans that I am developing, because of the money


that is being spent as I've highlighted, the proposed new clause


is not necessary. In terms of the amendment for, the equality of


opportunity, this as you said requires the Institute to promote


the opportunity to debate this. I the opportunity to debate this. I


know why you've tabled it, why it is important. It is crucial to widen


access and bridges are patient and ensure apprenticeships in technical


education accessible to all, which is why I was glad that this year we


have our 60 million fund to help encourage apprenticeships, in our


most deprived areas of our country. I want to reassure the House that


the Institute or pensions and technical education will have to


have due regard to widening access and participation. We carried out an


equalities impact assessment before publishing the post-16 skills plan


which concluded the reforms are likely to have positive impact on


individuals with protected characteristics. In particular those


with special education needs and disability, those with prior


attainment, those who are economically disadvantaged. The


economic assessment concluded that all learners would benefit from the


proposed technical education reforms, which will give people


access to high-quality technical education courses. I believe the


need to promote equality of opportunity in connection with


access to and participation for technical education has already


exists in the legislation under the section 149 and 105 of the equality


act. It is expressible leak set out in sections of the 2009 act that the


Institute must have regard to persons who may wish to undertake


educational training within its remit. The Secretary of State has


the power to provide the Institute with further guidance under that


section. I hope that explanation that you confidence. I'm committed


to ensuring people of all backgrounds have equal


opportunities. Over Christmas, he will know that we removed the need


for people who had hearing, apprentices who have serious hearing


difficulties to do functional English and are able to do sign


language instead. That's an example of my commitment as well as the


extra funding we're getting to employers and to providers in terms


of getting more apprentices who are disabled. Of course. Could the


Minister confirm that bringing together the oversight of


apprenticeships and technical education in one place will bring a


court hearings into the system to help ensure and protect diversity


and equal opportunity by clearer guidance on all opportunities in


terms of career progression? My honourable friend and can think


of all on diversity issues and equality is absolutely right. It


will benefit the people who need it most. Many people from disadvantaged


backgrounds and disabilities are very much prominent in further


education and technical education. I just want to move on to amendments


five in terms of the apprentice delivery, but I thought the


honourable gentleman was a little bit unkind about the border. The


board's representative, Channel 4, the London group, where


construction, Ministry of Defence, retail, significant retail sector


member, and, as he said, three women on it. They are doing important


work. They are advising the Government, they are working with


business to encourage them to have apprentices and I think these people


are not being, as far as I'm aware, not being paid. They don't have to


do it but they do it because they want to serve our country and they


help the apprentice network, the chair, David Neville, is doing


important work on that. I paid review to them and I wouldn't be --


Mellor. Whether or not the Prime Minister has or has not, and


apprenticeship advisor. As far as I'm concerned, the Prime Minister's


apprenticeship advisor is the apprentice Minister, myself. And my


boss, the Secretary of State. Having some adviser or not, I don't think,


is going to change the course of history in terms of having


apprentices in our country. I'm grateful to his generosity. I think


a lot of us see him as a journeyman, to use an old-fashioned term. He is


a Minister for apprentices. In terms of representation, I do notice in


your list he read out and forgive me, because I did meet this before,


any trade union representation. Is he an active trade unionist, are


certainly was, would he agree with me that it would be desirable to get


buying from the workforce side, we do have some trade union


representatives on the board. I have to say, he was pleased to know that


I am still a trade unionist and what a good idea. The board is


independent but I will suggest it. I'm very impressed and supportive of


the work that they do, which is widely funded by ?12 million,


because of the work that they do to promote apprenticeships. Of course,


it will be the case that the institute will consult with all


these bodies, delivery board and other bodies, but, as I say,


identity we need to straitjacket this is so much red tape that please


stop it from being independent. The delivery board is not intended to


have any special legislative corporate identity and it would be


unusual to name it in legislation but, of course, they will consult


with it, as with others. If I can move on to amendments six, this


requires the Institute's expansion and anyone here to exceed by the


levy. It's important to clarify that the Institute will not have


responsibility for the budget, which resides with the Secretary of State


for Education. Then the Institute is not a funding body, it will be asked


to advise on the pricing of funding bands, the story finally from my


department and not from levy fines. It follows that the Institute should


not be obliged to spend funds to be raised under the levy. In terms of


the devolution, the honourable gentleman mentioned, it would be up


to the devolved authorities how they spend that money. If we were too


tightly spending explicitly to the levy received, there can be as


funding consequences for the programme as a whole. -- tie the. I


think the budget spending on apprenticeships in 2019 and 2020 for


England, and the devolved administration total in excess of


2.9 billion. As opposed to ?2.8 billion. Training is preferable to


directly linking the funding on a year by year basis to the wider


performance. Of course. I thank the Minister for giving way on that


point. The third largest college providing apprenticeships in


England, training ever 9000 apprenticeships nationally, the


Institute of apprenticeships are particularly interested in how the


funding formula works and how it follows the work they are being


directly in the gene disease. The point the minister makes your levy


and the funding criteria and how it will be delivered, in giving that


clarity, is very well this evening. -- welcome. I thank my honourable


friend AA and it is brilliant whatever college is doing. I will be


pleased, when I'm in the area, to either training. They will also be


receiving significant funds. I congratulate that college for the


wreck it is doing for apprenticeships. Now, amendments


seven would limit the power to confer new funding on the Institute


to state funded apprenticeships and technical education. All of the


Institute's print functions in part four, scheduled for the enterprise


act 2016, and schedule one of the bill apply to all apprenticeships


and technical education both occasions, not just date funded


ones. I would expect that any new funding coming from that should be


the same way to make sure they are fully effective and do not treat


anything differently in accordance with how they are paid for. We want


to ensure that as many people as possible can undertake an


apprenticeship or technical education course and I would not


want this to be restricted to those that are state funded, purely


because the Institute's functions have been limited. I now we spawned


to amendment eight. -- respond. It is important that it is considered


what apprenticeship might be considered appropriate for 16-24


-year-olds and we know that apprentices are important to school


leavers and making sure that anyone from the age of 16 will have an


offering of either academic or technical education, or an


apprenticeship. The occupational maps, which the Institute will be


together, and which will guide Institute will be based on


information about the skills needs of the country. They will focus on


helping productivity and meeting the needs of employers. By putting any


constraint around the development of the maps and the occupations


included, such as focusing on a particular group of the population,


it would damage this overall aim. My department runs a number of highly


successful promotional and advertising this is to help make


sure young people access the right apprenticeships for them. And a


significant amount of 16-18 year olds take up stands objects. Will


even as they give way? Can't I just ask the Minister on the point of


STEM subjects and the advice given, is the real problem that, actually,


successive governments have tried to do that and this legislation is very


well-meaning in trying to do that, and will make a positive difference


in many respects, but isn't the very real problem that successive


governments have failed in their desire to persuade people that the


vocational route is as good as the academic route? Isn't that a


problem, culturally, for this country, which has the Devil also


decades? -- bedevilled. That is right, one of the first things I say


is transforming culture. As said, it's not just governments, its


business as well that have underinvested. It has always been


seen as a so-called... I head each end, Cinderella sector. The whole


purpose of the Sainsbury re-forms is to change behaviours and give


apprenticeships and skills, and technical education and prestige


that they deserve. The real question for the minister, as it was when I


was a Schools Minister, and other people, when a Conservative,


Liberal, Labour relic, why would it be different this time, given that


this is the sort of...? The Minister is absolutely right in what he has


said, but why will it be given this time to all the other times that


have gone before? Well, I wasn't around with the other times, but I


do believe that reforms... Of course we have difference. There is


cross-party consensus on the Sainsbury forms, the levies are a


fundamental reform and it's not just about changing this. -- reform. I


believe there's a new conversation about apprenticeships and things are


changing. Of course, the proof of the pudding will be any teaching but


we are on Egypt of something very special but a lot more has to be


done. -- the tip. I will just speak briefly on the other amendments.


Some of them. Because of time. The amendment nine, we... Feel that we


don't need to, whilst it's important, I understand, things that


the honourable gentleman races, we feel that it's not necessary to have


an amendment on that. -- raises. The important feature on amendment on


apprenticeships and it is on qualifications making up an


apprenticeship to want an end assessment. By not mandating


qualification standards unless they meet these criteria, ensuring that


individual employers have the freedom and flexibility to turn how


they train as an apprentice is to make sure they gain full confidence


in C, -- competency. In terms of the education copyright permissions,


there are very complicated... I understand why the honourable


gentleman has brought them through. We don't agree, we don't think it's


necessary. We think some of it is covered by existing legislation, but


we do think the Institute should have rights of copyright,


particularly... And the employers who are the licensees will know


this, whether... The bodies, sorry, that work in the Institute will know


that the Institute should have copyright. We don't agree with


changing the word, roots, because we think it will be confusing to


employers. I wanted to be procedures. I want technical


education, identify the word tech levels because it's dumbed down an


important provocation. In terms of amendment 17, the power to transfer


technical education certificates, we have a duty of care to the taxpayer.


The industry is not making money out of this, it's about giving them the


power to do so if they so choose. Having a duty of care to the


taxpayer. I think that's important why we don't support that amendment.


In terms of the quality assurance agency in an 18-21, the organisation


was not already named -- the organisations that are already named


already have this. This clause reflects in part of the changes that


are being introduced in the higher education research bill that is


currently in the other place. Now, I don't think that the proposed


amendment 20, which specifies apprenticeships included those of by


high-risk Asian Institute, is required. I'm Claire that they can


apprenticeships include all apprenticeships. -- higher education


institutes. . Providing training. -- clear. I thank the honourable member


for the amendments and other contributions for the other


honourable members and I hope my responses to these amendments have


reassured the honourable member Polak in this house about this. I


beg to move that easily withdrawn. -- tenders. -- members.


I did want to pick the use of my remarks on this amendment in


context. I was speaking to someone recently who made the very good


point. Who is sitting on the bathrooms and kitchens in Poland.


This person had very good experience of delegations from Romania working


in this country. The conversation we had was about Brexit and the skills


shortage in the United Kingdom. Brexit, whichever side of that


wrong, gives an opportunity to our wrong, gives an opportunity to our


country to try to address the skills shortages that we have, for decades,


relied on filling by importing workers. There are fingers


roundabout, I don't know them exactly. As to the proportion of NHS


bodies who were trained abroad. We would all conceive it is quite a


high proportion. Those people often, not always, come from countries


which can ill afford to lose them. The UK as a rich country because we


haven't got our technical education and apprenticeships architecture


correct ends up poaching skilled labour on occasions from countries


who desperately need that Labour to build their own economies. He is


making a very thoughtful point and he may be aware that in Lithuania


there is now a very successful party there is now a very successful party


which is against in the -- emigration but immigration. I'm not


surprised. I had the joy in the last Parliament of visiting Lithuania and


that's the sort of thing we talked about. In those days, Lithuania was


already starting to import labour from Moldova, outside the EU,


because so many Lithuanians with their skills had come particularly


to the UK and Ireland to apply their respective trades and I'm intrigued


specifically. What this bill does and I think what my honourable


friend on the front has sought to do is to beef up the bill in two ways.


One is to introduce even more confidence in the new system which


we will have and part of that confidence building is towards


national standards because this, I think, addresses the issue or


partially addresses the issue raised partially addresses the issue raised


by my honourable friend about the parity of esteem in which we talked


about earlier this afternoon between mental health and physical health,


departed esteem between vocational and academic. At one point in my


life, having been a semiskilled worker for a number of years, a bus


driver and professional driver, I faced a fort in the road. Was I


going to go down the vocational route? Be a plumber? Or down the


academic route, be a lawyer. I went academic route, be a lawyer. I went


down the route and became a lawyer. I don't regret it at all. One of the


reasons I did that was because of esteem or lack thereof. Another one


was because you get to work indoors, plumbers are on building sites


working outdoors I don't like the cold. In those days, I'm talking a


little while ago, the money was better in Lord and it was in


plumbing and I'm not sure that's the case now. We let in a capitalist


society. Part of what we need to do is to moods towards that parity of


esteem and it's the sort of thing is the Minister has been trying to do


during his tenure in that job through this bill. Part of it in a


capitalist society is to pay people more. If you want parity of esteem,


started being people equal amounts, start paying the plumber is as much


as the lawyers and this being capitalism we are moving to that


because of skills -- shortages. New clause one, I quite understand what


the Minister said about some of the information that he's already


act, but I think having it on the act, but I think having it on the


face of this bill as my honourable friend the member for Blackpool


South has said would be helpful in terms of the message we sent about


confidence and similarly with new clause to in terms of having a


system for those representative system for those representative


panels were more representative and were in place. I welcome what the


Minister has said this afternoon, his assurance that those panels will


be in place by April and I hope they will have a bread of representation


which should I think be on the face of the legislation. He replied


positively in a slightly different context of trade unions being


involved. This is not simply some kind of tit-for-tat, you've got the


bosses on there, we've got to have the workers on the hour. That's


important but it's about getting buy in from all sections of our society


for this new regime to build towards, as I say, addressing the


skills shortages that we will face under Brexit because under Brexit,


there is no mistake, the price for staying in the single market would


be free movement of labour and free movement of people. The United


Kingdom population as a whole have said they're not up on that, they


don't want that, they don't want free movement of people are free


movement of labour. We are not staying in the single market but


were not having that free movement either. There will be restrictions


and we ought to be using that any and we ought to be using that any


train up for the jobs and we don't train up for the jobs and we don't


keep putting skilled people from abroad whether Lithuania are


elsewhere. We need for that national elsewhere. We need for that national


standards. I think that for the confidence we need proper advice


because careers advice, certainly in England, has been to say the least


patchy over the years. My own Government remember when we set up


Connections and that was a resounding success, certainly in the


West Midlands. I think that new clause four, I would urge the


Minister to think again because it is to do with building confidence,


particularly new clause four sub three B and D, be reading, ensure


that such information of advice and guidance may be taken into account


by the relevant authorities and partners to meet the needs of local


combined authority areas. And 43 D would be to quote monitor the


outcomes of such information and advice and guidance for recipients.


Because that is part of confidence building that we have a regime which


is sensitive to a local labour markets and local labour market


world changed greatly come April 2019 when we are out of the European


Union. This bill is part of the Government is surprisingly given


what's not happening and other areas, showing a bit of foresight


about that and I congratulate the Minister and Matt Wood that we had


such foresight about some of the ramifications Rebecca and other


areas of public endeavour. But we don't. This bill is a step in part


of that digs for me. I'm not saying that's when a minister sought to


introduce to the house, but I do think we should look upon positively


in that way. I think the new clause four would help build the confidence


in the new system and make sure that it was reflective and flexible.


Because the Minister, in referring to amendment nine, and the ones


friend from Blackpool side said are friend from Blackpool side said are


under the umbrella of nine, talked about employers having freedom and


flexibility. Amendment nine is to do with recognised technical


qualifications, something that I mentioned earlier in this debate,


which is to do with national standards, certainly for England,


that we have those as part of the that we have those as part of the


confidence building measure but also as part of making sure that we have


the right people with the right skills. In a sense, workforce


planning. This country is pretty poor at workforce planning. The one


area where we could have excellent workforce planning because the


number of employees is so enormous and almost all of them work for the


state is in health care delivery. Yet, it's absolutely appalling. We


don't have enough Doctor strange, dentists, not enough professions


allied to medicine, the botanists, radiographers, yet that is the one


area at workforce planning, which the Government could get right, and


this is not just this Government that has singularly failed, though


the coalition Government of things to go backwards in terms of shutting


down some nurse training places and so on. But the figures are the


number of employers on the NHS in England alone is a huge that one can


take into account social training and do some pretty good workforce


planning at the kind of skills one is going to need in five years, the


ten years it takes to train a doctor and so on. Since 1948, arguably,


we've been rubbish about. I think having national standards is


important. It's important for confidence and workforce planning. I


would urge the Minister to have another think about the import of


amendment nine, if not the actual wording of it. Because it's all very


well having flexibility and freedom for employers, which I think were


correct me if I'm wrong, as to why correct me if I'm wrong, as to why


he thought amendment nine should not be supported in the insight from my


honourable friend from Blackpool side to withdraw it. The Minister


should have another think about that because national standards are


important. I draw on my own experience. And qualified as a


lawyer, I take exams which covered everyone he was seeking to be a


cluster in England and Wales. A national exam. For most of us, if we


passed it, we then went on to the equivalent of an apprenticeship, it


was called articles of clerkship, two years citizens office, when that


was changed, no longer to be in national exam taken by everyone who


wished to be a solicitor in England and Wales, but became a moderated


one to the other. It changed to a one to the other. It changed to a


legal practice course. And standards went down. I see that having taught


-- talked to people in post secondary institutions at the time,


having myself trained article clerks who had come through the later


system when we didn't have the national standards. Having national


standard is not a guarantee of standard is not a guarantee of


But it is something which can be But it is something which can be


used by any Government quite legitimately and quite properly to


make sure we have confidence in the system and that those who are going


through an apprenticeship system and are coming out as fully qualified


has a qualification which is worth having for them as an individual and


is worth every society having. I think national standards are


desirable in that context. I thank the honourable gentleman before


giving way. I just want to make the point that qualifications can be


mandated in an apprenticeship standard if it's a mandatory


requirements set by the regulator, he was talking about... These


include qualifications recognise as the legal requirement, licence


practice, reduced as a... When applying for jobs in the occupation


related to the standard and the apprentice would be disadvantaged


the job market without it. I thank the job market without it. I thank


the Minister for that clarification. He helpfully makes the point of me.


We are going to have national standards in certain fields of


endeavour which he has just endeavour which he has just


helpfully laid out. I think if I may say so, there is a contradiction in


his position which I don't think I suffer from this contradiction. When


we look at amendment seven, to do we look at amendment seven, to do


with the state funded aspect, where my honourable friend from Blackpool


size would insert the word state funded and the Minister, I find,


persuasively, the ministers set out why he thought that would not be


right to have an amendment because, as I understood him and I may have


misunderstood, he was looking for a more overarching model which would


encompass privately obtained qualifications. I agree with him


there. I'm just saying if one is not accepting an amendment to seven,


then there is the logic of accepting something like amendment nine to say


it's not just going to be state funded and we are going to have


national standards, not just on that broad but restricted field the


Minister just helpfully read out to have it more broadly than that


because I think that would be better for confidence and better for our


economy. It would be better for the people, many of whom will be young


people, but not all of them, who will be getting as qualifications. I


ask the Minister to think again. A similar issue arises to me in


amendment 18 through 21 on the quality assurance agency for higher


education and its involvement in these whole process. Again, that to


me is about confidence that employers and prospective


apprentices and for the younger ones, their families, it confidence


they can have any system that it is they can have any system that it is


going to deliver a qualification which our country needs and which is


that those individual that those individual


apprenticeships when they finish will not only likely have a job, but


will be contributing to society in a way which we would like them to back


to the workforce planning point. I think that the Minister and the


Government to think again on amendments 18 through 21, not the


exact wording of them but to include the quality assurance agency for


higher education as part of this process of agencies, which will have


a role to play in the planning and in the maintenance and perhaps even


of raising standards, that would be desirable. I wish to make a brief


contribution building on I was a member of the Bill committee and it


was a very constructive Bill committee with much cross-party


support, both with the Minister who has a real passion and a real depth


of knowledge in this area and well supported by our shadow minister who


demonstrated a genuine interest in this particular area. I want to


focus on one specific area which the shadow minister raises in his desire


to promote the equality of opportunity. For me, that includes


those with a disability. Specifically those with a learning


disability. This Government has made great progress in helping more


disabled people into work, 600,000 were disabled people in work in the


last three years, which is fantastic. However, those with a


learning disabilities still continue to find it extremely difficult to


take, to benefit from the opportunities of work. It is about


6%. Of giving way but does he agree with


me that we need to help the employers to deal the people with


disabilities mental health issues, disabilities mental health issues,


because that requires a lot of support for the employer as well as


the person taking the apprenticeship? Absolutely. That


going to make because it is both... going to make because it is both...


It takes time for people to develop skills but it gives an opportunity


for the employer to be able to provide a suitable opportunity for


the person with the learning disability. We tried to give


everyone an opportunity, that is around 6%. The worst percentage of


any disability and it provides the largest challenge. When I was the


Minister for disabled people, I went along to Fox's Hotel in Bridgwater


and I was incredibly impressed by the fact that they managed to get


80% of their young students into work. A three-year course, two years


inside a working hotel where they land to have independent living


skills and also to work towards having a job once they've finished.


Within that working hotel, name the learning the skills that were needed


for their local talent, which was hotels, restaurants, care homes. In


all our own individual constituencies, we've got our own


skill gaps, so you would adapt it accordingly. For yeah, they spent


the year continuing their learning directly in the workplace. My


honourable friend for High Peak highlights the importance for


employers, it gave the employers and opportunity to have support. Fox's


Academy would come along and provide training, advice to the employer and


the staff, gave the young lad or lady the opportunity to learn those


skills patiently over a year and, to me, it was an apprenticeship. They


were learning skills on the job. I invited the team back in to talk to


me. We ask about increasing numbers and they said they could, but the


final yes expensive because we have to go in and support the employer do


that training. -- final yeah. It seems, to me, every can read that


this is an apprenticeship, we can access the funding which is being


created three V and create a huge number of opportunities. --. I read


met with the Minister. He set up the Maynard review and I'm delighted the


Government has accepted everything one of those. I want to pay tribute


to both mencap and scared for the work they get as part of that to


help reshape some tangible opportunities. -- Scope. I want to


sleep to the Minister and say that I'm thankful he saw that through. We


touched on this but I want to urge the Minister to crack on with those


pilots, make a real opportunity pilots, make a real opportunity


because every young adult well seize that opportunity if they argued on


it. These are the people who, having met with hundreds of young adults


with a learning disability, they are desperate to be given that


opportunity. I want to see those opportunity. I want to see those


pilots and I want to see this made a priority, and, in his summing up,


explain where we are with that, what is the timetable and what can we do


to raise this with local lawyers? -- employers. Thank you. It's a great


opportunity to speak in this because I was a member of the build


community as well -- committee. I was disappointed there was not a


current amendment brought forward for this, at this stage, reflecting


any build unity, which seem to be any build unity, which seem to be


accepted at the time by the Minister, in broad terms, and I


hope... That in place to reflect some of those. And some of the


points being made this evening. Particularly by my honourable friend


on the front bench,, who has been a Geordie Borth in bringing in these


amendments. It is no surprise that there are no new causes at all in


the report stage, which is very unusual. -- it is a surprise. And


all the amendments and new causes were put in by my honourable friend


on behalf of the opposition, which is splendid and I support them but


it is a pricing and a bit disappointing, even with a degree of


agreement on the value of this legislation, on this Bill, and we


all know that we've got to do something about improving


apprenticeships and training. It is said that he had to train our own


rather than poking people from abroad. I think the first new clause


one, requiring... -- Scope. It's about the ad, completed


apprenticeships. -- poaching. Not just about the broader measures of


success. This specific quality of those apprenticeships is absolutely


vital to ensure that apprenticeships to reach to the development of


skills and long-term jobs after their completion. Those young


people, who come apprenticeships, have to be desirable by the


employers and their own employers. They have to be able to command good


jobs in the long and look forward to relatively high pay enhancement in


those jobs. I think maybe sure that the apprenticeships are quality, not


just in words, but actually that they can really do the things they


are required to do after they have qualified. It is so, so important. I


have to say I remember the days, long ago, when we had full


employment. Many decades ago. I used to teach further education during


that error and, in many ways, it was a better period than react now.


Happy for sure. Everybody who wanted a job got one. Teaching in further


education was a sheer joy. It has been more painful and stressful


since then, and less well paid. The conditions are not as good as they


were then I was there. That several decades ago. The early 1970s. We


also had large companies, large manufacturing companies mainly, also


the giant public utilities in giant public ownership, who employed


thousands of apprenticeships, apprentices each year. They had to


train their own and they wanted to make sure they were good at the end


of the day. Some of them have moved on to other jobs and crude and well


as well but non-US, it was beneficial both to the best


individuals and to our economy. -- none the less. We were training our


own and refilled to do that in recent times. We've left it to the


market, if one likes, and the market doesn't always work well in these


matters, it does require a degree of Government intervention. It is very


significant, as the Prime Minister said, using a phrase that has not


been used by any Government for a long time. Industrial strategy.


Talking about the need for industrial strategy. I absolutely


support that. We had a debate on industrial strategy just eight years


ago when the honourable member Leamington Spa let the debate and it


was very good that those words, I think, are significant. I think this


is part of that industrial strategy. We do next to reach a nice people to


rebuild industry because they don't produce enough any more,


particularly any manufacturing is sector. We do well in services, but


not in manufacturing. We have a trade deficit because they can't


produce enough and have to buy in from abroad. We have to rebuild this


section. Not in reinforcing manufacturing by producing efficient


to have a trade balance that is sensible, which we don't have any


moment. Apprenticeships have always been somewhat insecure in recent


times because companies are now smaller than a word, in general


terms. They are less secure because of economic crisis and indeed many


anecdotes I have from my own experience, just after the 2008


crisis, I was being driven to Heathrow for a visit, a


parliamentary visit, and the driver said he had an apprenticeship. The


company had been met has collapsed and you can stop being a cab driver,


which he could have done the an apprenticeship. -- been with. Other


examples of small companies training apprentices who are then poached by


larger, a lot more financially lucrative companies, saying that in


the motor trade, where you have small skills companies which are


training people and then they are pouched by the large companies that


do lucrative insurance repair work, and they compare... Of course I will


give way. I thank the honourable gentleman again. Just another


viewpoint. I don't have the figures at hand but the evidence does


suggest that apprentices and income, they are loyal to the company more


than other training schemes or early jobs than any other. They changed to


stay in the companies that they did their apprenticeship in. I'm sure


the Minister's ride for the majority but looking at house prices at the


moment, certainly in the Luton, I moment, certainly in the Luton, I


know of companies which do employ apprentices, small motor repair


companies, and they are under pressure to get a home if they can


earn a feud thousand more at another large company nearby, to help them


get on the housing ladder, they will do that. I agree that loyalty is


be loyal but if the pressure, be loyal but if the pressure,


financial pressures on their lives are as such that they have been


moved, they welcome any end, move. I am going to support all the points


made by my honourable friend from the front bench, but particularly on


the need for a strategy for improving careers education. And new


clause four. What we have to do is make sure that, when young people


are at school or in education, they are aware of the knowledge range of


opportunities out there and they don't look at a narrow field. In the


Luton, have to say, a high proportion of my local young


students want to get into the legal profession, for example. They want


to be professionals. What they don't appreciate is that there are highly


paid, highly skilled jobs in the manufacturing industry. Vauxhall


Motors, which has a plan in losing, the senior executives, almost all of


them started as apprentices, leaving school, doing apprenticeships and


getting up the ladder. Eventually doing high qualifications, such as


HNC and HND is. Becoming highly paid people in the company. People are


aware of them and we have to do have careers strategies to make sure


every young person knows of the thousands of different drills and


that human life. -- HNCs and HNDs. -- roles. Or just going into a local


company. There are a lot of things young people can do and life can be


very exciting. It is very important to do something which we enjoy


doing. I'm very fortunate that I like politics in my early life I


lead a knock in parliament, where I wanted to be. I don't regret a


minute of it. Sometimes people aren't aware of the enormous range


of possibilities and alive and having a very, very powerful careers


advice strategy, I think, is really vital, not just for the people,


young people and their own lives, but for the economy. If people are


happy in their work, they will work better, the economy will like that


and he will be a much better place. I have just one more story, just to


say what has happened in the region, which is a tragedy. We were a town


which trained thousands of apprentices and I know many of them


personally myself. Recently I visited a small manufacturing


company that makes components for Formula 1, jaguar, and they couldn't


find one to make it. They couldn't find one from a town of over 200


people that was dominated by manufacturing. Not one. It is a


disgrace that we have failed to gain sufficient people. I think there's


many other things I'm glad to say, but I could speak for an hour


unaided, I'm sure, but there are others who want to speak, then I


shall leave it there but I had the point I've made are of interest.


Thank you, Madam Deputy is legal. Clearly, I wasn't on the bill, but


clearly the Secretary for further education bill was a bill that


generated a lot of good debate and positive views about how we might


all improve, what we all want, which is the technical and vocational


education in our country and an improvement to apprenticeships.


There is no and can be no division between on that that was witnessed


by the contribution of the Minister and in a very good contribution of


my honourable friend from the front bench, and also the contributions. I


also wanted to just raise something which, I think set the context for


the Dell and really goes back to the remarks that I made to the Minister.


In the decades, it has been the desire of every governments,


whatever it has come up with, to try and do something about enhancing the


stages and is being about apprenticeships and technical and


vocational education. Our country has been levelled by a culture that


the technical and dumb aggregation as second class in terms of


situation ship to academic qualifications.


We all say it is wrong and it is. But culturely that has not moved in


the last 30/40 years. And I hope the minister is right. Can I say, I want


him to be right in what he said, when he said this, when I said to


him the question, why will it be different this time to all of the


other times? Because every minister, whether Conservative, Labour, or


whoever, would have had the passion and desire to exactly as the


minister himself has just said. So, I hope, and I say this to him as a


Conservative, and me as a Labour backbencher, I hope he's right. And


I hope that this time it is different, because our country is


held back as an economy, as a power by the fact that it isn't right at


the moment and it is also held back by the fact that tens of thousands,


if not millions of our young people, millions of our families, across our


country, have not achieved what they should have done because of that as


well. And so, when we talk about


inequality of opportunity, and the failure of many communities to


advance and to progress, all of those things, part of that is


because of the fact that we don't value vocational education in the


way that we should. Challenging that is what, it seems to me, is what


this bill committee has been about and why I wanted to come in and make


a small and brief contribution now. Let me say this, Mr Deputy Speaker,


the depth of the problem is this - how do we judge what is a good


school? I make no comment, other than to say this, when was the last


time anybody heard somebody say, I'm going to send my child to that


school because it's brilliant vocationally. The education at that


school is absolutely brilliant. The vocational qualifications, the way


they train them to skills, to be trained to be plumbers, builders,


the way they take up the opportunities that my honourable


friend talk about in Vauxhall. We have defence industries which are


crying out for engineers to do, to repair the ships, to do all of the


high technical skills and jobs there. There's thousands of


vacancies. When was the last time anybody said, I'm going to send my


son or daughter to that school because it is brilliant because they


will end up in that first-class vocational, technical job? It


doesn't happen. And that is a real challenge for us. As a Parliament, a


challenge for the Government and as for us in opposition, to work with


the Government to do something about that. I say these brief remarks, Mr


Deputy Speaker, not as a criticism, but as a challenge to us all. I tell


you what I think, I about dhully -- actually believe our country needs a


national crusade with respect to technical and vocational education.


It needs something which actually shakes the system up, which actually


says we've got a minister now who's saying these things. We've got


Shadow Ministerial educational minister saying the same. Let's


challenge our country to actually make all of this talk about the


importance of skills, the importance of technical education, to make that


a reality. If we can do that, we would improve our economy, but more


importantly, or just as importantly, we would also value the lawyers and


value the doctors and all of those things which are really important,


but we would actually, for the first time, in many respect, say to many


families to give them once again the esteem of work and to the esteem of


vocational education and our country would be better for it.


Educationally we would improve. But I tell you this, in my own view, it


would mean in many of our poorest communities, which it would be, but


in many of our communities where equality of opportunity, with


respect to education is a rhetorical myth rather than reality, would


actually be able to do something about that as well.


What an achievement that would be for a Parliament, let alone a


Government. So I wish the minister well. I thank my colleague for his


contribution and the contribution that everybody on the bill committee


has made to what I think is one of the most fundamental countries --


problems that our country faces. Thank you. I rise to speak on new


Clause IV in technical and further education. I'm building on the words


of my honourable friend from Wolverhampton and South-West. As the


minister knows through our time spent together on the bill


committee, this is an issue of particular interest to me. I would


like to thank the minister for the courtesy what he's explaining to the


department what he's doing in this area and introducing me to the


careers and enterprise company and for his keen interest in improving


careers education. However, after consideration, I feel that this


amendment is necessary and compliments the work already under


way, because while there is a lot of warm words and verbal support, to


not include careers education provision in this legislation is an


enormous opportunity missed. This bill is one that will shake up the


technical and further educational sector considerably and accepting


this new clause would show how important career planning is to this


House and to this Government. During private meetings before the


committee stage of this bill, real concerns were raised with me about


the lack of careers provision in our colleges as it stands. It has been


stressed that there is such a lack of advice available at the moment


that without explicit legislation on careers guidance it will be nudged


even further towards the back of the priorities queue. With overstretched


resources in colleges in mind I was very disappointed to hear in at


least one institution a receptionist had been asked to carry out careers


guidance, having had no specialist qualifications or training. The


problems regarding lack of guidance is stark and has been brought to the


attention of the department by the co--chairs of the sub committee on


education, skills and the economy, who in a report accused the


Government of appearing to be burying their heads in the sand


while careers guidance fails young people, especially those from


disadvantaged backgrounds and exacerbates the country's skill gap.


It seems clear that we cannot rely on warm words and reassurances


alone. We must have provisions in writing. In legislation. Because we


have an obligation to our learners. As we know, the world of work, young


people are entering is changing really fast. The sector and


apprentice start thas are learning in will have transformed eno nor


mousily by the time they are in their last year. The access to


guidance and advice shouldn't be left behind them when stepping into


a career. It should be more agile and responsive to the skills and


experience they are picking up. It is these opportunities that new


Clause IV would seize. The opportunity for a strategy to be


laid before this house, a strategy, specialised for further and


technical education that is on-going and gives para of -- parity of


esteem. Using the expertises for apprentices and technical education


is a huge opportunity and an opportunity too good to miss.


Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. My thanks to all of those who have


spoken here today. I don't want to, and I thank also the minister in


particular for confirming that new clause two, the implications of what


we asked for in the new clause two, will be satisfied by the Government.


I think that is an important concession or an important


confirmation, depending on how he wishes to look at it. Whatever it


is, we thank him for it. I wish Mr Deputy Speaker to withdraw new


clause one, but we will, because not least in terms of the powerful


speeches that my honourable friend for Gedling and others have made, it


really seems to us a missed opportunity that the Government is


not putting the strategy on the face of the bill. It is no disrespect to


the minister and his personal policies, but we believe that needs


to be embodied for the foreseeable future in the bill and on that basis


we will be pressing new Clause IV to a vote.


New clause one I leave withdrawn. We now come to new Clause IV to be


moved formally. Formally. The question is that new clause will be


read a second time. As many of that opinion say a, the contrary, no. I


think we'll call that the division. Division.


The question is new Clause IV be read a second time: As many of that


opinion say ayes. The Ayes 186, the Noes 274. The Ayes


186, the Noes 274. The Noes have it. Armlock. We know can to Amendment


one which it will be convenience to consider amendments to, three, 20


shadow minister to move. Thank you very much. May I wish you personally


a happy new Year? We want those to turn to the part of the Bill which


is extremely important and indeed is one of the reasons why this Bill is


in the form that it is and I shall come onto that in a moment or two in


discussing Amendment to add Amendment three. First of all I want


to focus on the importance of clause 14 and the introduction, the welcome


introduction, into the Bill, by the Government of the role of the


education administrator. We welcome that but we want to probe in


particular as we did in committee how this is going to work in


practice. That is the purpose of Amendment one. It is extremely


important to remember that's the end product that we are all aiming at


here is to have a situation where we hope, and I believe, that the number


of occasions on which the detailed insolvency provisions which are laid


out in the second part of the Bill will be required, will be as few as


possible. I will come on shortly to suggest why I think they are


particularly necessary and some of the issues around that. But this


particular Amendment would ensure that an appropriate assessment is


made of any potential impact on students and their education if an


education administrator puts a further education body into


administration, and takes action such as transferring students to


another institution, or keeps an insolvent institution open for


existing students, the Amendment would also require the Secretary of


State to specify suitable bodies to perform such assessments. This


Amendment has been put forward very specifically at the urging of the


National Society of apprentices. I think it touches on an area where I


hope this minister and I have common ground, which is the importance of


understanding what the end product of this new education administrator


is all about, and he or she is there to provide protections and support


that would not be available in the context of a traditional insolvency


process. And that is extremely important in terms of the position


of young people, and particularly people who might be at university,


sorry, might be at college, as part of their apprenticeship, or as part


of other training. One of the things that the research by the National


Society of apprentices has shown, and I want to speak particularly


here, to subsection three, sorry, subsection C, D and E, of Amendment


to clause 14. One of the things that research shows, this was in 2014,


and the figure may have gone up since then, is that apprentices pay


an average of ?24 per week on travel. That equates to a quarter of


the salary of an apprentice who is earning the apprentice national


minimum wage and research has shown that young people were choosing to


do the apprenticeships they could afford to get to rather than the


apprenticeship they were keen to do in some cases. In light of the


review process in England and the creation... And we have had


disagreements with the Government on the review process and we will probe


them strongly on it, but on this occasion this is what we are


concerned with, the impact on those potential apprentices. The travel


time between provider, employer and home. We believe on the size that it


is important that the Institute for apprenticeships as technical


education does take clear and early lead role in encouraging local


authorities and transport companies to ensure that all young people


including apprentices are covered by the travel concessions. Without a


high-profile champion for their needs apprentices can too often be


excluded from such concessions, as again apprentices -- apprenticeships


are perceived as employment rather than education and are excluded from


that definition. The entitlement the Bill gives students to continue,


works in practice, that is the cracks. This Amendment is intended


to be safeguard against an intended consequences. The education


administrator will be given for options to support education if


their college becomes insolvent. These, as were discussed in


committee stage, includes provisions to sell assets to keep a college of


thought, to bring in another body to take on different functions of the


college, to transfer students to another college, and finally, and


slightly ambiguously worded, to keep the college going, until existing


students can finish their courses. These are all sensible options. I do


not think there is anybody here who would suggest that they should not


be pursued by the education administrator, should students


education be put in jeopardy by insolvency.


In so doing that, that is why we propose an assessment of the impact


that the decision will have on students and the local community.


And by this assessments, we hope that any negative impacts could be


mitigated in the appropriate way. Briefly, for example, where an


administrator keeps a college going for existing stuptds to finish, it


would be entirely understandable and possibly probable that lecturers and


staff at that college might look to leave. The involvement of an


educational administrator would be a sign of a failed college and this


option would mean the employer would be closing in the near future,


anyway. Any exodus of staff in these circumstances could have untold


impacts on the quality of education received. So we would want to know


from the minister, as students would, I am sure, what transitional


measures would be put in place to protect the quality of education


being received in a college that was being kept open only on


life-support? Or should the administrator decide to begin sells


off college assets to deal with insolvency issues, what protections


will there be that resources that are integral to learner services


will not be sold off? Computers spring to mind.


But the impact of selling them off could be to mean fewer resources to


share between remaining students at the college and negatively impact on


their experience. What about circumstances where there need to be


transferred to another college? How close to their home and their old


college will the new college be? How much more expensive to get them


there? We know that college aten doughs spend a lot of money on


travel. It is risking making education inaccessible for less well


off. What might help them aseef education at this new education


facility if it is higher? Would the college be able to cope with a new


influx of students? Some find themselves forced to travel longer


distances. There is no reference in this bill to how they will be


compensated. As I said previously merges could be harm of the the


social fabric and mobility of young people in rural and suburban areas.


The implications for them to maintain their courses, which are


will be significant if issues such as travel do not come into it. The


commissioner when giving evidence to the bill committee said that


provision at levels one and two needs to be as local as you can get


it to the learners, whether in urban or a rural area. Accepting that if


people don't have the money to travel they will not be able to do


so. It is not clear how the Government will make the student


receives in the college kept open and to a high quality standard. Bev


Robinson the principal and chief executive of my own local college on


Lord Sainsbury's panel said, I would wish to make sure that learning


within a reasonable travel to learn pattern was protected as well as


students. I see nothing, I am afraid, Mr Deputy Speakers A the


moment and little has been said at the moment where the funding to


support that process will come from research released in 2015 by the NUS


and the association of colleges, showed that only 49% of FE students,


virtually half of them, could always afford their travel costs. Travel


time for those surveyed was an average of two hour and a 48 minutes


a day. A distance of 11 miles. Four in ten young people were relying on


financial support from parents or guardians for costs. This is


exacerbated by a funding scheme. Even that minority of councils who


offered discount travel to young people are unlikely to do so now,


following the continuing Government cuts. This amendment would at least


require that such things be considered so that appropriate


measures be put in place. Will my friend give way? He's much more


familiar with the bill than I am. In terms of the clarity he seeks to


introduce on the face of this bill, does he share my concern, perhaps he


doesn't because he knows the bill better, but I cannot see what an


educational administrator is. I know he or she will be an officer of the


court and they will carry out certain functions, but we are


talking about the technical and Further Education Bill, training


essential -- is central to what we are talking about. I cannot see on


the face of the bill anything that says there has to be a certain


education for an administrator. It is a bit fuzzy. My honourable


friend, as usual, is per acceptive. If we had the time and if it was


within the scope of this particular amendment I would acquaint him with


the passages of the committee where we discussed this at some length. I


think although we have not moved more specific amendments in that


area I think the minister and again I think this is obviously something


for another place, needs to respect further as to what needs, if


anything needs further to be put on the face of the bill, to answer the


sort of questions that my honourable friend is asking. But they are


perfectly legitimate and really important questions. And as I say,


ones that we did consider in the bill committee. So, there are a


number of effects to the implications these administrator


powers may have on students. That is precisely the point of the amendment


and to ensure that whatever impacts these powers have in practise, our


are assessed within the local circumstances of the colleges in


which those amendments are needed. I want to now turn to amendment two.


And this I hope would be an amendment that the minister would


have sympathy with. Again if he's not happy with the structure of it


then perhaps that can be juggled with. This amendment would give the


court the power to suspend office for student, student protection


action for the period of insolvency in which the educational


administrator has responsibility for responsible for an FE body. This is


a clause, sorry, this is an amendment which the association of


colleges are particularly keen to see addressed. They are concerned


that the insolvency regime is being introduced at the same time, as a


separate protection regime takes place in higher education under the


control of a new office for students, which of course, Mr Deputy


Speaker, has been entering committee stage in the other place only today.


They believe and I think we have some sympathy with this, the


Government has missed an opportunity to introduce a joint legal regime,


covering both further and higher education corporations. However, we


are where we are, and that is the basis on which this proposal is put


tonight. This would mean that an amendment is needed to the TFE bill


to remove duplication between the HE intervention regime and the FE


regime because otherwise colleges and again I feel strongly about this


because it particularly affects my own local college, that colleges


that want to maintain or develop their HE provision, which is an


important part of the system, and which involves up to 150,000


students. 1,000 of whom are at Blackpool college. As it stands we


have two Government bills, creating two separate control systems, with


two sets of obligations on colleges. Ministers will say social education


and the powers will only be used in exceptional cases and eve eve


theably colleges will have to prepare for the worst. If they have


higher education provision will need to boil a plate to double insulate


their finances to satisfy the organises they deal with. This could


make it more expensive to run HE provision than it needs to be. This


is the purpose of this amendment to conif firm the OFS regime will be


suspended during a special administration and I would like to


speak briefly to amendment three. Amendment three is talking


particularly about the need to ensure that staff are employed by an


FE college are continued to acure statutory teacher pension seem and


-- scheme and local pension scheme obligations during the


administration. This is an issue which has not simply been raised by


the association of colleges but also by UCU. Mr Deputy Speaker, colleges


employ large numbers of staff and not all of them are teachers. In


addition to caretakers. Catering staff and cleaners. They employ


learning support assistance, IT technicians, administrators and the


like. We made a particular point at second reading of emphasising that


just as with universities it's not simply the teachers and the


administrators and the bureaucrats. It is everybody who keeps that


institution going. So, it is the case with FE colleges. And we would


be appalled if, as a result of any of these issues, people had their


pension rights or their pension, their potential pension rights


affected in this way. So, in all, we believe that there


are more than 70,000 people in colleges who are not teachers and


who are eible in law to member of a Local Government Pension Scheme.


There is some evidence the bill has raised concern among those running


Local Government Pension Schemes and it is resulting in additional


financial demands on colleges. We don't think it is the Government's


intention to renege on debt, because it would simply pass on the koths to


other employers, including councils themselves. Colleges have no choice


about whether to offer membership. They provide access to decent


pensions for 70,000 people. And the purpose of this amendment is simply


to clarify that staff employed by an FE college continue to acure those


obligations and Government will ensure that any additional debt will


be covered. That would ensure that statutory obligations are suspended


but employed staff can continue to acure entitlements but does not


result in penalty interest, which are written into TPS and LPS rules


once they recommence. In case the minister thinks this is only a


hypothetical issue, it is worth making the point and UCU have made


the point, that there are already real concerns about pension scheme


deficits in certain colleges and that the regulations, if this issues


are not addressed, could cause alarm with end lenders and raise interest


rates and this of course would negate, or could negate, the stated


aim for the introduction of insolvency regulations. And that of


course would preclude the increased confidence in the insolvency


scenario of the Government and we are very keen to see. Will my friend


give way? Very briefly. The minister is well aware of this scenario


because the City of Wolverhampton college has a big pension problem. I


have discussed wit the minister and he's been extremely helpful in


trying to resolve thatfy man shall issue faced by -- that financial


issue faced by my local college. I am grateful for my friend for that


intervention. Because of course he's immediately provided a specific


example of precisely the issue which has led us to bring this amendment


forward tonight. I now need to move, Mr Deputy Speaker, to our final


amendment on the bill, and the one in which we will be pressing, which


we will be pressing to a vote. And this is an amendment which would


ensure that further education bodies, with a track record of


acuing assets publicly could not be transferred to a profit private


company. Mr Deputy Speaker, we had a significant discussion about this in


committee. And for the benefit of those who were not in committee, I


will try to and for the benefit of those who were in committee, I will


try to summarise as briefly as possible. It is the principal is


extraordinary important. On our side of the committee it raidses the


current situation with this bill raises some real significant issues


about what would happen to the transfer of assets. The information


says that assets should only be transferred to charitable bodies. It


is on that point that I want to focus my remarks wrsmt the bodies


are not charities, then it must be transferred in accord dance with the


charitable purpose of the trust. It leads to a list of bodies to which


assets could be transferred including sixth form colleges and


Governing bodies. Expected or transfers should be made to bodies,


but that is not the same as saying it is required. When colleges were


incorporated in 1992, it took them formally outside of the local


authorities and my honourable friend, the member for Luton North,


was very eloquent in this in committee, but we have to take into


account the asset base of building in many cases was build up with


local authorities support and funding over 20 or 30 year-period. I


reminded the minister on committee about my own college which he has


visited. He went to one of the campuses, which has buildings and


elements that go right back to the 1950s and the 1960s. We didn't, when


the building colleges for the future process took place in 2000, we did


not get the new college that we hoped we would get for a variety of


reasons as to where we were in the food chain, but nevertheless, I am


illustrating the point that many of the buildings we are talking about


have acured their estate either on a financial by sis... Will my


honourable friend give way? Yes. I will.


Would he agree that this is an issue in higher value areas, whether this


is public land that should be used for the common good? I thank my


friend for that intervention. She has a double qualification to speak


on it, first of all as a member of Parliament for the constituency that


she represents, but also she knows whereof she speaks. This issue is


accentuated in those sorts of areas. Money has come in over the years,


both pre-1982, the Labour Government introduced into thousands, money put


in by regional development agencies, Regional Growth Fund developments,


offshoots of regional and structural funding and as I have previously


said further education colleges also deliver higher education. If we have


a situation where HE provision is being delivered at a rate of 10%,


12%, it is important that we do not lose that situation in this


position. I do not want to rehearse at, we have not got time to rehearse


tonight, the arguments that were made in 2011, about the private


sector, private for-profit sector training coming in and being


involved with the equity funds, whose investment platforms were


focused. But I would say, and I think many in the sector would also


say, that the private equity funding sector, although it can be extremely


profitable and useful, is based on a relatively short-term view of


providing management and initial capital to buy other companies and


then taking them off the public share market and it is reasonable


for us to be concerned about what might happen in terms of disposal of


land with significant amounts of public assets. It is not simply


whether it is a good thing to transfer significant number of


public sector assets to eight private provider, but what the


guarantees are both financially, and more importantly in terms of the


nature of the body and the guarantees to the students, and


people employed there, if such organisations use the insolvency to


take on colleges. Ministers we talk about guarantees for staff but I'm


sure members will realise this does not offer protection forever and a


day and I have significant experience of this in my own


constituency in Blackpool over the years with people who have been


outsourced from the Civil Service and put them to other organisations


which are then passed on to someone else at which point automatic rights


and security of tenure almost became extinguished. These are the concerns


that we have. They are not concerns that are irrelevant. They are


concerns that are pragmatic and concerns of principle, and of course


it is not as if there has not been concerns in this area previously.


The December 2014 the Public Accounts Committee severely quizzed


officials who had responsibility about why private providers were


able to engage in an trammelled expansion without checks. And it was


said that repeatedly advice about vast sums of money going without due


process had been ignored. And the potential, as the former chief


executive of the Association of colleges said, for private


organisations to strip college buildings and facilities or pick


assets, is there. For the avoidance of doubt we are not saying we would


oppose any private sector takeover of a college in any circumstances,


we are seeing the education administrator would have to make a


judgment, but we are seeing without the protection of this clause, the


potential for it would be very high, that is why we are determined to


press this Amendment this evening. Thank you. I thank the honourable


gentleman for his amendments. I begin by discussing Amendment one


which affects clause 14 and I have to stress that is unlikely, in the


unlikely event that there is insolvency, we want to ensure that


disruption for students is minimised. According to the clause


in the Bill, they are likely to come from bigger companies and have


educational experience, and saw the same system that happens with


insolvent companies. The education minister will decide how best it


will be achieved. The subsection suggests ways in which this might be


done. The education administrator will need to consider specific


circumstances of insolvency and determine the most appropriate


approach. It is inconceivable that the education administrator would


draw up proposals without having had discussions with a wide range of


stakeholders such as the commissioner, student bodies and


others, and considering a wide range of issues. This will lead to


discussions with local authorities and key stakeholders and where


appropriate it may also involve a conversation with the clear levers


personal adviser. I undertook to consider the matter further. I hope


the honourable gentleman from Luton will be pleased that we are keeping


our promise in committee and will ensure that guidance to local


authority on responsibilities being introduced with the children and


social care act, in the event of a college insolvency affecting a young


person for whom they are responsible. We expect that the


education administrator takes account of the quality of


alternative provisions and if it is necessary for students to complete


their studies and other locations that they consider the impact of


travel distances. The honourable gentleman will be aware that he


provide funding to colleges to support disadvantaged young people


in addition to disadvantaged funding, some 550 million in 2016,


that can be used to subsidise college busses, there is also the


bursary fund, colleges will be able to offer this funding to eligible


students who transfer under a special administrative arrangement.


There may be scope for a scheme to be set up to cover additional travel


costs if they have to travel to another location. The honourable


gentleman for Blackpool said during committee we do not want this to


become a long winded and time-consuming process. I share that


view with them, it is in the interests of students and staff to


have certainty as soon as possible. Requiring formal assessments to be


carried out in a way proposed by the Amendment would lengthen the


process, reduce the administrator's distress and -- reduce the


administrator's discretion. I have shown these are at the front of the


administrator's Maine. The next Amendment, Amendment to, I


understand the issue about double protection. I understand why he has


tabled the Amendment. The Amendments are necessary because the court on


healing and education administration application already has discretion


to make any interim order, that it thinks is appropriate. It is


necessary with relation to the student protection plan and the


court has the power to do this under the Bill. In terms of the pensions


we have followed as far as possible the provisions of the administration


regime that exists for company insolvencies. We propose to adopt


similar provisions for college insolvency is, which will be very


rare indeed. As with any administration once the


administrator has adopted contract of staff they are personally liable


for the costs of those individuals such as salary and pension


contributions. He would only take on the appointment if they are


confident sufficient funds are available to meet the costs. Some


pension contributions will continue to be made and benefits accrue. Some


staff may be made redundant, whether at the start of the education


administration, but this will be in accordance with statutory employment


rights. Those staff's contribution to the pension fund will end the are


no longer employed but this is no difference to any other person


contributing to a pension scheme, but the benefits accrued prior to


the of employment will not be lost. In terms of the transfer issue, I


accept that the honourable gentleman feels very strongly about this.


Further education colleges are statutory organisations who can deal


with their own assets. A solvent college is key to transfer property


to any person or organisation they choose. In order to benefit from it


they would expect to receive value when transferring an asset to a


third party and in general this would mean transferring at market


value, although this deserves -- depends on the nature of the


transaction. In this case we are only talking where a college is


insolvent, an extreme case. What I need to make clear to the honourable


gentleman is that there are four vital protections to safeguard


assets which may well have been paid for with money from the public purse


that have to be dealt with because the college is insolvent. First, and


Mike solvent operational colleges who wish to transfer property, if


the administrator decides, they are restricted and who they can transfer


assets to. This is prescribed in secondary legislation, 27 B, higher


education act. In addition, transfers can be made by companies,


the company must be established for purposes which includes provision of


educational facilities. Just as with any other administrator, any chance


there must be with the purpose of achieving special objective and


minimum disruption. Creditors have a general right to challenge should


they consider the education administrator is selling on the


cheap for example. Finally the Secretary of State Orwell Welsh must


must approve the proposed transfer scheme, any approval will include


the purposes of special objective. This quadruple lock answers the


concerns, I believe. I hope my responses have a shoot him and the


House about underlying concerns -- I hope my responses have assured him


and the House. Thank you. I have taken note of his


views and the proposals he has made. It does seem to me, however, and on


that basis, we are prepared to withdraw Amendment one, on Amendment


to an Amendment three, I again have heard the reassurance that he has


given. I think that when this legislation reaches the other place


there needs to be further examination of the issues around the


pension schemes. These are important issues. I am not entirely convinced


that the assurances which I should have been made in good faith will


actually do the business. As regards amendments 22, I thank the Minister


for his explanation about what he described as the quadruple lock, but


I am afraid, not least because of past practice, we have to plan in


this Bill not for the best circumstances but for the worse. It


is an important issue of public policy and on that basis we do wish


to press amendments 22 to the vote. Is it your pleasure that Amendment


one be withdrawn? Aye. Amendments 20 to be made, As many of that opinion


say Aye. . Division. Clear that lobbies.


Amendment be of made, to the contrary ayes... And for the nose is


Mark Spencer and Graham Stuart. Order! The ayes to the right 183.


The Noes to the left, 278. The ayes to the right, 183. The Noes


to the left, 278. The Noes have it, the Noes have it. Unlock.


Order! Under the order of the House, 14th November, 2016, I must put the


question necessary to bring conclusion to the proceedings.


Consideration has been completed. I will now suspend the House for more,


no more than five minutes in order toation a decision about this. The


division bells will be rung two minutes before the House resumes.


The Government will be tabling the appropriate consent movement, copies


of which will be shortly available in the vault office and will be


distributed by the door keepers. Thank you.


Order. I can inform the House of my decision. The purpose of standing


order 83, I have certified that clause to - 38, and schedules 2-4,


to the -- to the Technical and Further Education Bill, relating


exclusively to England and Wales, and I have certified that clause one


and Schedule one of the Technical and Further Education Bill is


relating exclusively to England and within devolved legislation


competence. Copies of my certificates are available in the


vote office. Understanding order 83 consent motions are required for the


Bill to proceed, does the Minister intend to move consent motions? No,


it'll have to come after we have gone through. Standing order 83,


will resolve itself into legislation of the grand committee and therefore


into legislative committee. Order. It comes afterwards. We are going to


go through this. Order. I remind honourable members


that if there are divisions only members representing constituencies


in England and Wales may vote on the consent motion for England and Wales


and only those visiting constituencies in England may vote


on goals for England. I call the Minister to move the consent motion


for England and Wales only. The question is that the legislation


grand committee of England and Wales consents to clause 2-38 of, and


schedules 2-4, of the Technical and Further Education Bill. As many as


are of the opinion say Aye. Aye. The contrary No.. The Ayes habit. The


legislative can't committee consents to clause one of and Schedule one to


the Technical and Further Education Bill, As many as are of the opinion


say Aye. The contrary, No.. The Ayes habit. -- have it. I beg to report


that the legislative gland... Order. I beg to report that the legislative


grand committee in England and Wales has consented to clause is 2-38, and


schedules 2-4, of Technical and Further Education Bill. The


legislative grand committee England has consented to clause one of and


Schedule one of Technical and Further Education Bill. Point of


order. Thank you. I am sure the House was entertained by that fast


that we just witnessed, but I hope that you link that adjournment you


had the opportunity to take advantage of the facilities, get


yourself a nice cup of tea, because it was a pointless waste of time.


Because of the way this motion has been designed and the lack of time


available it has not been possible to adjourn to the legislative grand


committee to consider these important measures. Given that


English votes for English laws is supposed to be paramount, as it's


not disappointing that English members have not had the opportunity


to lend the English... Order. It is not a point of order. The debate


took place because we thought it was important to have a special debate


on health as well. The House agreed to the rules of the House, the rules


have now been applied. Thank you for raising the point of order. It is on


the record. The bottom line is, this is what the House has chosen, that


is the end of that. Right. Third reading. Time for a cup of tea.


Order. If you have got a problem do it through the usual channels and


the proper channels, it was not a point of order, you know it, that is


why you raised it. The bottom line, if you do not like it, let the House


get on with the business. Minister to move third reading. Thank you. I


beg to move that the Bill now be read a third time. I want to give


special thanks to all the individuals who shared their time


and knowledge during the passage of the Bill through the House, the


officials who worked so hard to bring it to parliament, and those


providing written and oral evidence, and they want to thank members of


the committee for the diligent approach and consideration of the


practical applications of the Bill, and to those members who have


spoken. I am clear about the priorities that we want to see in


apprenticeships, further education and skills, creating a ladder of


opportunity for all, a transformation of prestige and


culture, widespread high-quality provision, a system that addresses


our skills needs, job security, social justice, prosperity. This


Bill seeks to build those priorities and to our system, bringing to life


the reforms needed to ensure that we have a skills, education sector that


rivals the best in the world. For too long technical education has


been overly complex, overlooked, and values. Putting employers at the


heart of these changes, and as recommended by Lord Sainsbury's


independent report, we can provide a clear route to employment for our


young people. The changes in this Bill will support the achievements


of those young people, from difficult backgrounds, such as those


with special educational needs or disability, and referring to what


the honourable friend for Swindon said earlier, we are doing a lot to


implement. We are doing a lot to help apprentices with mental health


difficulties and apprentices with severe hearing problems will be able


to do sign language. 23% of those who access technical education which


will have some form of special educational needs, compared to 7% of


those taking level three, these measures in this Bill will drive up


the productivity in our country, turning us into an apprenticeship


nation providing the skills we need for our country to thrive. That is


why the CBI has said that businesses have long wanted a vocational route


so this is a step forward. Thank you for giving way. I thank him for the


work he has been doing taking forward this Bill. I commend him.


Does he agree that one of the most important factors is engaging


businesses in these apprenticeships and making the routes to skills more


relevant for business. It will not only address productivity


challenges, but improved life chances of the people involved. My


honourable friend, and I thank you for his work on the committee, is


correct. That is widely introduced the apprentice levy, to change


behaviours, to get businesses involved in supporting


apprenticeships. That is we created the panels. That is why we are


putting and financial incentives to businesses and particularly small


businesses, to ensure that they higher apprentices. This Bill also


introduces an insolvency regime for the further education sector that


will end that unlikely events provide protection for learners to


minimise as far as possible disruption to their studies. And


offering certainty to creditors. We heard from those who supported the


insolvency regime and the protections it includes for


learners. While there were issues, many spoke in favour of the clarity.


One company said they are keen to lend more into the sector. On


insolvency he will remember in committee I suggested that all


colleges should have both within management and governorship, members


with financial skills, professionally qualified, so that at


least we have skilled eyes looking at finances so that the stakes are


not made internally. I accept the premise of the question. I would not


want to put a straitjacket on the colleges. It was acknowledged by the


principal of a college that you may need different things for different


colleges but this should be as much financial expertise as possible,


where there is real financial leadership, those colleges are


always in good financial health. We forecast that we will have spent a


total of 140 million propping up colleges facing extreme financial


difficulties by March 2000 17. That's money that should have been


spent on education and training priorities. Whilst we envisage that


only a small number of colleges will find themselves insolvent, providing


protection from learners and clarity from creditors is a crucial part of


what we are trying to do, and our responsibility to support the


sector. Since the committee we have been in a position to publish the


consultation. Following conversations about the importance


of incorporating the views of students in the running of the


institute, it comes as no surprise that this sets out the firm


expectation that the institute will establish an apprentice panel, by


April this year, reporting directly to the board, ensuring that the


learner voice, the apprentice voice, is that the heart of the Institute.


I am glad that the honourable gentleman is encouraged by our


approach on this. Before the Institute is operational in April we


want to publish the consultation for the Institute shall set out more


detail about how it intends to carry out its functions. On the insolvency


elements of the Bill we discussed and committee the protections given


to students with a special objective and the possible ways the education


administrator could ensure that disruption to studies is avoided or


minimised. In particular we discussed whether the particular


account the administrator must have should be extended to other groups.


I recognise the importance of taking into account the needs of Kier


leaders and that they may need additional Pastoral support should


the college ever be subject to insolvency. Such support is best


provided to each individual by the local authority, should an


insolvency occur and we will take these steps, to ensure that the


guidance we produce for local authorities on their corporate


parenting responsibilities include advice in the event that the young


person they are responsible for attend colleges that enter


educational administration. There is much to be proud of about our


current further education. 71% of these colleges are good too


outstanding. More than 50% are in good financial health. The


proportion of 16 - 18-year-olds taking up apprenticeships is at a


record high. Reforms made following the 2011 review. 88% of students


were in a sustained education destination. High-quality further


education can have a transformative impact on young people. That is why


we have announced as part of the Spending Review to protect 16-19


national base rate of ?4000 per student for the generation of this


Parliament and by 2020 if we include the adult education budget, the 19


plus apprenticeship and, more funding will be available to support


adults further education participation than at any time in


England's history. This will build on the key


priorities, enabling students to make better decisions about their


future to secure their future prosperity that of our nation. In my


constituency, we are very fortunate in having a sixth form college which


has been short listed in the six best colleges in the country for the


times award. The one apprenticeship courses but there are concerns they


cannot get enough students to apply for some of the business admin


courses, and there is a real demand from business but those students yet


there are loads of apprenticeships doing courses were business does not


happen as jobs for them. Would he agree with me that provisions in


this bill to develop that synergy between education, apprenticeships


and business are welcome and are absolutely vital in addressing the


school shortage in this country? I thank my honourable friend for that.


She is absolutely right. Everything we are doing, this bill, the


apprentice Levy, the drive up of standards, the encouragement of


apprenticeships, the money, 2.5 billion doubled by 2020, they are


designed to do exactly that and solve the problems she has talked


about. Mr Speaker, the OECD has said the UK has a promising plan to


advanced technical education from a last resort to a first choice.


Colleges have also spoken highly of the plan, including the principle of


my own college, Harlow. She said, we're not just about courses but


grit. We believe any reform that brings us closer to employees mean


our students gain higher skills and better jobs. This bill is a once


your bill. It does what it says on the tin. It transformed the prestige


and quality of apprentices, addresses the skills deficit,


protect students in the event the colleges face extreme financial


difficulty and ensures the most disadvantaged are able to climb the


ladder of opportunity. The bill understands the Prime Minister's


commitment to a country that works for everyone and I commend the bill


to the House. The question is that the bill now be read at the time.


Can I associate myself with the comments that the Minister made,


giving thanks to the officials, all the members of the committee? And


particularly my own colleagues on our side, who did sterling work in


supporting us on the front bench. Can I also particularly commend the


support that the public bill committee have given to us? You will


know the role of the opposition in challenging government on these


matters is somehow equivalent to that of David and Goliath. We


occasionally get a few slingshots in. I am grateful that the


slingshots on this occasion had not incapacitated the minister


concerned. This is an important bill. It has important provisions in


it, and that is why we have not opposed it, either at second or


third reading tonight. However, that does not mean to say that we will


not continue to have profound concerns about the implementation


and process and progress of that. It was indicative in the excellent


although relatively truncated debate that we had on the amendments,


whether we're talking about the contributions from my honourable


friends. My honourable friend is still here. Might honourable friend


who gave an inspiring speech and my honourable and relatively new front


of the House, all of them are talking about practical issues in


terms of implementation. It is practical issues of implementation


that we still have real concerns about. It is not just a matter of


Ofcom yearly that we have concerns. For so long and too late, there were


no links between higher education and further education in the way in


which the bill was brought forward. Perhaps more importantly, and I


really would ask ministers to reflect upon this, we have had a


spirited discussion this afternoon about whether we need to have a


strategy for careers advice on the face of the bill. We still believe


we do have and we believe that the Minister has missed a trick in that


respect. We think it would have entrenched his position for the


careers advice and not diminished it. But the broader issue of course


is that so much of the what the Minister has talked about and what


we would all like to see is not simply an issue for DfEE. If we want


to deliver traineeships, which I know he is passionate about, we have


got to get structures and links between the DfEE and DWP to come the


concordance of it some issues. If we wanted to live the careers advice,


there has to be a similar engagement and a balancing act with the DWP.


These things are not things that should be left in that particular


box. The situation for apprentices is not one, and I pay tribute to the


Minister for the passion he has shown for apprenticeships, but they


are still handicapped by a number of things which the government has yet


to prove its bone fide on. That includes issues around the GCSE


situation in English and maths. I have heard encouraging words on that


but we have not nailed this issue down, and that will not go away


unless there is a satisfactory solution to the continual repeat and


soul destroying process of retakes in GCSEs. The other point of course


that needs to be made is that apprentices have decided to do what


they want to do, they do not just work or exist in a vacuum. That is


why it was ruled to be out of the scope of this bill but it is still


an important issue. There were issues around how apprentice


families are supported in terms of child benefit and other issues. They


need to be looked at not within the minister's and Secretary of State's


department, but other departments as well because of the boys, they will


be a real issue problem. It was mentioned in passenger the issues


around evolution, and I do not want to go much further on that tonight,


but I think it is something the government needs to think very


clearly about. The government is going ahead with the Devo Max


process and yet we have a bill here and structures within that bill that


do not reflect what the reality will be of the delivery of adult


education and possibly apprenticeships. Personally, it is


not seem to me in the long term that you can have the proper skills


strategy on a localised basis without taking apprenticeships into


account as well as adult education. There has been no addressing a this


bill. The issue of insolvencies, the Minister has spoken about that, I


associate myself with what he said about that being a minority issue.


But it is worth remembering the context in which this comes, it is a


profound period of funding cuts and everything that goes with it. And


that is something that the government needs to address. That is


the context they have decided to introduce the bill. I would also


say, in passing, and the comments the Minister made about careers


advice, trouble supporting everything else, that if the


government had taken up our proposals, perhaps we would have had


a much quicker and speedier process in that respect. I want to return


finally to this issue of how we actually delivering this and the


timescale involved. It is three months until the apprenticeship levy


funding kicks in. We still do not know who the new chief executive


will be, we do not know about the board, we have had some progress on


these issues today, we are told that example B skills funding agency will


stay in charge of the new register of apprentices. The Minister will


have seen the comments made in the last couple of days on this. There


is genuine bewilderment out there as to why it is not of course which is


administering the apprenticeship assessment organisations. Is the


real reason they are doing it that they are basically civil servants


and it would give every reserve part to ministers to micromanage? That is


not question of him but one of his successors. Those are really


important issues. They will need to be reflected on in the Other Place.


What I would say is this, there were two macro key issues that still


remain. Is the funding and staffing numbers dragged out of the


government going to be adequate for these responsibilities? I would say


doubtful at this stage. And how an's length or genuinely independent of


judgment for the new institute be? These are not just tech issues,


these are issues which if not resolved properly or not gain the


full hearted consent of the stakeholders and providers and all


the people that the Minister needs and we all need to get those targets


met and to get his aspirations and my aspirations for apprenticeships


to be a reality. The question is that the bill we now read a third


time. As many as are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". I


think the eyes have it. The question is as on the order paper. As many as


are of the opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". I think the ayes


habit. We come now to the adjournment. I beg to move that this


House do now adjourned. Nick Dakin. I would first like to pay tribute to


all those working in sixth form education for the fantastic but they


do on but half of our young people and country. In particular, I would


like to take the opportunity to praise the two excellent colleges


that serve young people in north Lincolnshire. Having led John


Leggett is principal before being elected to this House, I know how


important this phase of education is in transforming life opportunities.


I also know that, since I stood down as principal, the challenges facing


those colleges has been immense. Three direct cuts were imposed on


16-18 funding in the last Parliament while 5-16 funding was protected.


13.6% cuts, colleges now face a further 8% erosion of the current


national funding rate over the remainder of this Parliament due to


inflation and there are further pressures from increased employer


pension and national insurance costs. The average funding for


students and sixth forms, schools and academies is now ?4583, 20% less


than the funding received to educate each 11-16 -year-old and 47% less


than the average university tuition fee. I ask the Minister how, in


order logic, how it can be cheaper to educate a 16-18 -year-olds


compared to A15 -year-old or 19-year-old? The government claims


it has provided funds for every full-time student to do a full


timetable of courses but it has not published any research into


sufficiency of funding provided to educate 16-18 -year-olds. The


government does not know how much it costs to do a full timetable of


courses. I congratulate my honourable friend in securing this


debate and use the right person with his track record to be leading it. I


suspect I will be mentioning Lowestoft sixth form college, like a


lot of colleagues. It is the underfunded, unsung heroes of


British education system and with the right resources, their key role


in addressing this country's productivity gap. The honourable


member is right to praise Lowestoft College. It does a fantastic job on


but half of the young people that the educate. He is also right to say


they need to be properly funded to ensure they continue to do that very


good job into the future. The National funding rate, currently


?4000 for 16 and 17-year-olds, and ?3300 for 18-year-olds, is


calculated by taking the settlement derived by the DWP and dividing it


by the number of students. It is no more sophisticated than that. In the


independent sector, sixth form these are higher than secondary fees to


reflect the actual cost of delivery for this age group.


It is very of this area that those students who might not excel


academically could excel. May there not be spikes in young people's


mental health if we do not enable them to do these more rounded


courses which is so beneficial. The honourable friend is absolutely


right in highlighting the fact that certain elements of the curriculum


are under threat when there is such pressure on funding in this way and


enrichment activities are one of those many activities which had been


under threat over the last six years. There has been a dramatic


collapse in funding which has an impact on the education. As someone


who has managed resources, I know there are only a small number of


variables to play with when you face significant funding cuts, as the


sector has since 2010. Alongside the usual good management things around


BackOffice, procurement, charges, efficiencies and so on, there are a


limited number of options. You can increase shall teaching staff


contact time, you can reduce York student contact time, increase class


sizes. In reality, you have to do all of those things to make things


hang together. He is making an incredibly powerful case. On that


issue, would he agree with me their sixth form colleges are cruelly


treated? Unlike schools and academies, they cannot cross


subsidise from the morgue generous funding available for schools. At


the very same time they are the most efficient, they are the most


underfunded section of the higher education area. My honourable friend


is right to point to the performance of sixth form colleges but also the


pressure on the funding of sixth form colleges in particular. The


funding of 16-18 -year-olds is not just affecting sixth form colleges


but schools, sixth forms and academies sixth forms as well.


These are the typical ways these have altered since 2010. In 2010


most level three students, progressing to courses in year two.


In most cases, the enrichment has gone. Tutorial has shrunk. General


studies has disappeared. Number of advanced level courses taken note is


normally three in 40 years. This leads to significantly lower student


contact time. I know from experience that there is a direct correlation


between contact time and achievement particularly from students who have


struggled to achieve at 16. My north Lincolnshire neighbour, thank you


for giving way. Congratulations on securing this debate. He will know


that his neighbouring constituency, being a coastal community, has


problems with social mobility. Will he shared with me the hope that the


Minister in his response will indicate the Government's continuing


support for sixth form colleges such as that in Grimsby? I thank my


honourable neighbour for his contribution. All four Humber sixth


form colleges are high performing. I am sure the Minister is listening


carefully. I am sure he will respond and give us all hope for a very rosy


future when he comes to speak later in the debate. The impact on


students has been significant. The sixth form college associations


survey showed that this is an increasingly narrow and part-time


experience. Colleges have dropped courses as a result of cost


increases. 39% have dropped courses in modern foreign languages. That


majority have reduced or removed extracurricular activities including


music, drama, sport and languages. Worryingly, 64% do not believe the


funding that they will receive next year will be sufficient to support


students that are educationally or economic lead disadvantage, the very


point that my neighbour was making. I thank my honourable friend for


giving way. As has been mentioned, the college in my constituency has


experienced significant funding cuts to the point where it has lost


around ?1 million per year. The impact of that has been a reduction


in courses. Does my honourable friend think that also have an


impact when it comes to students looking to choose a variety of HE


courses? Absolutely, there is an impact on progression into higher


education, particularly in courses like modern foreign languages, and


also concerning the end other courses. Today it is no 15-17 hours


of weekly tuition and support has become the norm for sixth form


students in England. This would be considered part-time study in most


national education systems. Research commissioned by sixth form college


association describes sixth form education in England as uniquely


narrow and short compared to the model adopted in Shanghai,


Singapore, Sweden and elsewhere. In Shanghai, the upper secondary


curriculum is based on it fundamental subjects. In addition


there are extended subjects and activities that allow for greater


specialisation or new or collective forms of learning, finally there are


research-based subjects that take two hours per week. Overall a total


of 35 lessons per week plus one extra hour per day for meetings or


physical exercise. Students receive at least 30 hours per week of


tuition. I will give way. I want to thank the honourable member for


giving way. I am proud to have two colleges in my constituency. One


college was celebrating 60 students getting Duke of Edinburgh awards and


that another student 84 -- at another college 85% went on to


university. But there are huge challenges, does he agree there


should be a review on funding to tackle the realistic cost of


providing this well rounded range of subjects so that we can compete


internationally? I welcome those comments. He is on the money,


literally and metaphorically. The Minister needs to take away one of


the issues is to review the funding and go back to check the resourcing


of fact well rounded education that we want to see. The reason for


making this international comparison is to say, this is what is being


invested in other high performing systems, if we want to compete


effectively with those high performing systems, we need to be


willing to look at what we are doing in a self-critical way and set out


our stock accordingly and I am sure that is what the Minister will want


to do when he speaks later. Look at Singapore, upper secondary


curriculum is based on core examination subjects, elective


examinations, and compulsory non-examination subjects. Core


examination subjects studied for eight hours per week. Students


choose CD or for elective subjects and study each for 4-6 hours per


week. Assembly, physical education, character development, take up to


four hours per week. Students receive up to 27 hours tuition and


support, 32% for those taking for subjects. Duration is two years or


three years. The European comparison, Sweden, upper secondary


education is structured primarily through three year national


programmes, each programme covers a series of foundation subjects,


English, history, mathematics, science, social studies, Swedish,


religion, in addition a number of subjects specific to a given


programme are chosen, therefore students receive 19 hours tuition


per week, but crucially this entitlement is for three years


rather than two. The Institute of education concludes its report by


describing the English model as low hours and short duration. Students


and other leading education systems receive more tuition time, studied


more subjects, and in some cases can benefit from a three-year programme


of study rather than two. I give way. I congratulate the


honourable gentleman in bringing this issue forward. This has been


raised in my constituency by a principle who has felt the problem


with enrichment, the narrowing of education, the problems of


efficiency, at the heart of children's education, and the impact


internationally. With the honourable gentleman agree the potential impact


of the Government was to look at this on our universities, the impact


of picking up the narrow education, the impact of universities having to


pick up the pieces if we are to compete internationally? In some


ways this reinforces the point made earlier. The system describes...


Students in England by contrast with those elsewhere in the world,


students in England receive half as much tuition time and are following


a three subject diet. In addition the funding cut for 18-year-old


students has created a financial disincentive for schools and


colleges to offer a third year to complete sixth form studies, and


these are very young people who need additional support and time. The


Institute also contrasted the narrowing of the sixth form


curriculum and England's compute to the model of international


competitors. They said unlike other national systems where the amount of


tuition increases in upper secondary education, when compared with the


lower secondary phase, the English experience is the opposite. The


sharp reduction in the number of subjects studied post-16, an average


of four subjects, no reducing to three, compared to 316, ten or more,


appears to represent sudden movement to a part-time curriculum.


Bizarrely, despite these huge pressures on mainstream 16-18, since


2010, the Government has enabled to spend money on unproven, untested


new and different types of provision for 16-18 -year-olds. This is money


that could have been spent on mainstream students and I believe it


has been an unwise indulgence in what I would say as cortical


peccadilloes at a time when there is a contraction in both the population


and budgets. 169 new academy and maintained sixth form work opens


between 2010-2015, total number of students remains static. Curiously


the Department for Education offers little. The question is that the


House do know I'd turn. -- does no adjourn. The Department for


Education offers little in the way of practical advice to make school


sixth forms work and has not researched the effectiveness of


these reforms. In March 2016 ministers, and I welcome the fact


that ministers introduced five new tests to ensure that new sixth forms


are viable, but this is a limited step because it does not cover the


sixth forms that are already open. There is no small institutions with


180, in rolling fewer than 100 students. That is emerging evidence


that some of the performance is not what we would hope for. Meanwhile


university technical colleges have struggled to achieve viability and a


system built around exams and transfer at age 16 and six articles


and one did not open as planned. Sensible policy would be to review


sixth form which are particularly small or underperforming at a time


when money is short. Ashton sixth form college would want


to be mentioned. Would he agree that, where demand does exist, that


can only be met through a school academy or free school sick form


provision being created? I think my honourable friend makes a good


point. The Minister is listening carefully and will take that point


on board along with the other points the honourable members have made. In


conclusion, I would like to pose a few questions to the Minister. Why


are sixth formers in England only funded to receive half of the


tuition time and support as sick form is in Shanghai, Singapore and


other leading education systems? Why are they facing a standard diet of


just three advanced level subjects while another international systems,


sixth formers can study eight or nine? I think it is very good to


have the Secretary of State educated in the comprehensive system who


attended a comprehensive college. That is the first I welcome. She


will be well aware than 16-18 -year-olds choose to study in


colleges while less choose to study in schools. All are affected by the


squeeze on funding for their age group. Will the Secretary of State


move away from funding sixth formers based on an arbitrator funding rate


and review funding to ensure it is linked to the realistic costs of


delivering a rounded, high-quality curriculum? For the Secretary of


State agree to work with the sixth form College association in


conducting this review, building on the current evidence base? Finally,


in the state sector, education funding decreases at the age of 16


to an average of ?4583 per student per year. In the independent sector,


school fees increase at the age of 16 to an average of ?15,333 per


student per year. What does the Minister think are the implications


of this for social mobility? On the day the Prime Minister has made an


important speech on this matter, sounds to me like the sort of


everyday injustice that she would be keen to tackle in her desire to


build a shared society. Can I start by adding to the adulation of the


House to the honourable member for Scunthorpe? My congratulations on


securing this debate, ensuring that high-quality post-16 education is a


priority for the government and the country. We recognise the


contribution of the dedicated staff working in all types of post-16


education and the hard work of students. A record proportion of


young people are now participating in education, training or


apprenticeships. I can give my honourable friend and the honourable


member for Grimsby the assurance that the government does support


sixth form colleges, including the college mentioned by my honourable


friend. Education and training in England is widely respected around


the world but we are determined to make further improvements to ensure


that 16-19 -year-olds are ready for the demands of the workplace, either


by moving directly into school employment or continuing to higher


education. We are reforming academic and technical education for those


over 16 and are learning from the best international systems. All


countries that we look to learn from have a stage of education that no


longer exclusively takes place in school. There are options for


students to gain relevant experience to prepare them for work, either


through apprenticeships or technical education or to prepare for further


academic study at university. The way this work and age this starts


varies considerably around the world. In countries like Germany,


Switzerland and the Netherlands, there is a high level of investment


by employers in vocational training in the secondary face and an early


emphasis on workplace training. This leads to lower rates of young people


not in education, employment or training than in England but the


difference in academic standards between pupils from different socio


economic backgrounds in these countries is larger than in England.


By contrast, only one fifth of 15-19 -year-olds in Japan and Korea are


enrolled in vocational courses and the remaining percentage continue a


rigorous academic programme. It is very useful to benchmark ourselves


against these countries, to understand the strength and


weaknesses of our education system and to raise our expectations of


what students here can achieve. That's why I am determined why we


should improve our maths teaching by learning from the high performing


Asian systems, such as Shanghai, Singapore and Japan, by adopting


maths mastery. But it is not simply a case of choosing one country to


learn from. Our priority should be making our whole system world class.


But there is much to be proud of in comparing our education system to


other countries. England's 15-year-olds continue to perform


significantly above the OECD the average in science and for the first


time in 2015, above average in Reading. Our performance in maths


remains at the OECD average and a survey of adult skills identified


them as having the week as literacy and numerous C skills out of 18


countries in 2012. In the case of literacy and numerous C, we have now


made the continuous study of English and maths in post-16 education and


training compulsory for students who did not achieve a GCSE or past 16.


We are reforming both academic and technical education. International


examples of ours are widely used. But these comparisons need to be


carefully interpreted. It is important we understand what these


estimates include, how programmes serve longer duration or higher


intensity are funded and how they sit beside other routes for young


people to take from school to work. It is not always clear in the


various studies were work experience is included in the figures. In the


planned ours used to benchmark our own programmes for funding, we do


not include self-directed study or home work, which is a key part of


the space of education. What is important as we develop a system


which serves our pupils and economy. In England we have an established


academic group the sixth form students through well-respected


A-level qualifications. Our system requires pupils to make choices and


therefore to a certain extent to specialise in a smaller number of


subjects 46th form stage but some degree of specialisation is a


feature of systems and other countries as well through the


A-level route, our academic system is effective in preparing pupils for


successful futures through in-depth studies of the subjects they choose.


We have some of the best universities in the world. The


proportion of English students studying in higher education is high


that it has ever been. But we are not standing still and are


strengthening the design to make sure the pupils continue to be fully


equipped for the future. We have given higher education providers a


leading role in redesigning a number of key A-levels to ensure that


pupils who take these qualifications are prepared for undergraduate level


study. We have also redesigned the assessment model, increasing the


time available for high-quality teaching rather than taking exams.


Where we have not matched our neighbours is in technical


education, where we have a major programme of review underway. It is


conducted by Professor Alison Bolton 2011, and that found that at least


350,000 16-19 -year-olds working towards vocational qualifications


offered no clear progression. The review led to the introduction of


new study programmes and per student funding is the perfect qualification


funding to ensure their funding and every college in line with other


16-19 institutions. As a direct result of the recommendations in the


report, we now only include approved qualifications in performance


tables, meaning young people can have confidence that their


qualifications will enable them to progress to further study or


employment. But we recognise that the system is not doing enough to


support students who wish to pursue technical education and we recognise


that we're still not matching the most effective systems of technical


education in other European economies. Following the publication


of the Sainsbury review, we are embarking on radical reform of


England's post-16 technical education system, learning from best


systems. We are working to introduce new technical routes, enabling young


people to gain the knowledge and skills required for work according


to standards designed in partnership with employers and bringing training


for young people and adults in line with the needs of business and


industry. We will support increases in productivity, which has lagged


behind. It will also help ensure that young people and adults can


move into sustained and skilled careers, which lead to prosperity


and security. Alongside this, we are continuing the reform of


apprenticeships, increasing the quality of apprenticeships through


more rigorous assessment and grading, and giving employers


control of the funding so they become more demanding. We are


committed to reaching 3 million apprenticeships starts in England by


2020. I am genuinely very much welcome his support for the sick


form sector and colleges but he has been speaking up for nearly ten


minutes and has said nothing about the arbitrator funding which has


been the focus of so much concern expressed on all sides of the House.


Only committee will look at this funding issue? The government will


look at how much funded is required? Colleges in my constituency are


desperate to deliver that but it is being undermined by the lack of


funding, which he has not addressed so far. If only the honourable


member her just waited two more seconds, we would have come to that


pivotal part of my response to this debate. Clearly, the right level of


funding needs to be in place to match our ambitious academic and


technical reforms. In 2013, investment in education in the UK as


a whole, combining public and private sources, was above the OECD


average course or faces, including post-16. We have made the system


more coherent so sick form and colleges are all funded and have


performance reported in the same way. Funding is on a per student


basis, giving schools and colleges the freedom to design the best


programme for their students rather than awarding institutions for


providing large numbers of small qualifications with little value.


I thank the Minister for giving me on that point. He sees that all


institutions are treated the same but in the reviews that we have seen


undertaken in many parts of the country three schools in particular


were out with this review. Is he aware of the sixth form college in


my constituency that has recently received a requires improvement


rating, it is operating below the numbers required. Does he think that


is a good use of public funds in the context of this debate?


These reviews can take into account schools, but there are 2000 schools


or more that have sixth forms and if you are to take all schools with


sixth forms into the review that would make the system and


manageable. The free system was introduced to challenge the call


because we have had a monopoly provision of schools in the past.


The free school phenomenon has been significant.


Dees are challenging the status quo in those areas and are providing


high-quality education. We need to see more of these innovative schools


to open up opportunities for young people that they would not have


without free sixth form schools. Does he accept that the research


available demonstrates that the funding of 16-18 -year-olds since


2010 has reduced in real terms and this has reduced the level of


tuition time down to 13-17 hours per student? I am interested whether he


recognises that as an issue and whether he sees it as a problem? I


recognise that resources are tight for 16-19 education and training and


in recent years we have had to make post-16 savings while working hard


to sustain funding levels for schools, bearing in mind that


success in school 316 is the best predictor of outcomes in post-16


education that we have made clear commitments where we have protected


the base rate of funding at ?4000 per student for all types of


provider until 2020. This was announced the 2015 Spending Review.


And at a time when public finances are under great pressure. Providers


receive additional funding for more expensive programmes and that is a


large uplift for providers who have pupils who are studying four or more


a levels provided the achieve minimum grade requirements, and ?540


million of funding is allocated each year to enable schools and colleges


to give extra support to disadvantaged students, essential in


helping those from less well-off backgrounds, or who have not


attained well before the age of 16, to get the help they need to


succeed. We plan to spend ?20 billion in 2016-2017 to make sure


there is a space in education and training for every 16-19 -year-old


who wants one. All types of providers are funded for 600 hours


per year per full-time student. This will allow for three A-levels and 50


hours tutorials plus either one AS-level or 150 hours of enrichment


or a work experience. While we have not been able to protect budgets for


sixth form education in real terms there is funding to ensure that


every sixth form each student has the opportunity to undertake high


quality study that will enable them to move on to skills work or further


or higher education. Our commitments to the post-16 sector has


contributed to the current record high proportion of 16-18 -year-olds


in education or apprenticeship and the lowest proportion of young


people, applications are at an all-time high. I recognise there is


more to do to continue improving our post-16 education system to make


sure it is established as one of the best in the world that we should be


proud of the achievements so far and recognise that we are building a


system that is both affordable and in keeping with our country's needs.


The question is that this post as no adjourn, as many as are of that


opinion see aye. The Ayes Havret. Order. Order.


No one can deny that politicians are important people as I am sure they


would be the first to remind us. It is up to them to make the laws which


govern our lives. You and I might call them bigwigs. The origin of


this word. This was the meeting place of the law courts for almost


seven centuries and wigs made an appearance when Charles II is made


them essential for polite society. Wigs


Live coverage of the day's proceedings in the House of Commons including an urgent question on domestic violence cases and a statement on mental health and NHS performance and the remaining stages of the Technical and Further Education Bill.