Mr.
Hayes: I wonder whether the hon. Gentleman, who is making
a cogent argument, supports our view that there should be a better
route from apprenticeships into HE that creates a pathway for a
vocational learner from a diploma through to an apprenticeship and
beyond? Many will not want to take such a path, but those that will
should have it facilitated for them; barriers could be removed via
financial support, for
instance.
Stephen
Williams: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention.
I am not sure what the Conservative proposals for smoothing the path
from apprenticeships into higher education are, but they sound like a
worthwhile objective, which I
share. I
conclude by referring to an amendment that for some unknown reason was
not selected for discussion. Whatever the nature of the advice and
guidance that is offered to young people, it should be open to
inspection by Ofsted. Will the Minister comment on how an assessment of
the careers advice and guidance that is provided for in the Bill will
be made? Much store has been set by it, but how will we know that it is
of sufficient quality to deliver the objectives that we all
share?
Jim
Knight: It is a pleasure to take over the ministerial
baton from my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, and I pay tribute to the
excellent way in which he started our proceedings. I have discovered a
charming and conciliatory side to his character—I knew it was
there, hidden away. It is an equal pleasure to respond to the amendment
tabled by the hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings. He is
iconic of a certain type of parliamentarian. I will not start to guess
what type, but he has certainly demonstrated that in our proceedings so
far. I
want to put to rest the misconceptions about the effect of the clause
and explain how it fits with the duties that are already in
place. Legislation under section 43 of the Education Act 1997, as
amended by section 81 of the Education and Skills Act 2008, which we
remember debating just last year, already requires secondary schools to
provide a programme of careers education to their pupils—the
change that was made last year—and in discharging this duty, to
provide impartial information and to give advice that promotes the best
interests of their
pupils. The
clause will be underpinned by the statutory guidance that is currently
in preparation and which I have been considering. My Department will
consult formally on the guidance later in the year, and I expect it to
set out core information and advice on 14-to-19 learning options,
including apprenticeships, which all young people should receive. I
reassure the Committee that every young person will get information on
apprenticeships, thanks to the implementation of the amendment made
last year, which was implemented through statutory guidance.
Some
evaluation of those matters will be included in the self-evaluation
process. The delivery of information, advice and guidance by local
authorities, as delivered by Connexions, which was also the subject of
the 2008 Act, will be assessed as part of the comprehensive area
assessment carried out by the local
authority.
Mr.
Hayes: Indeed, Kieran Gordon, the expert witness from
Connexions, referred to the 2008 Act. He said that it
“might” make the matter more assertive. The matter he was
referring to is the independent advice and guidance that we have been
discussing. Why does this Bill not mirror that in the strength of its
provisions? Mr. Gordon feels that it does not go far enough.
Is he
wrong?
Jim
Knight: I will go on to develop that point and directly
address it. It is important to establish in the minds of the Committee
that every young person will get information about apprenticeships as a
result of the statutory guidance. Mr. Gordon has not yet
seen the guidance and so he is not in a position to judge—no one
is—because we have not yet agreed it or published
it. Some
young people will have specific needs and will want further advice on
apprenticeships that reflect those needs. The clause emphasises the
duties of schools with regard to apprenticeships by requiring them to
consider the best interests of each pupil when giving advice. The
effect of the clause will be to ensure that schools provide appropriate
and differentiated advice that is tailored to meet the needs of
individuals. Having
established that every pupil gets information on apprenticeships, there
will be some who are not suitably qualified for them. It would be
unreasonable to
burden schools and make them give pupils advice and guidance on
apprenticeships if they are not suitably qualified. That is an example
of why the stance taken in the Bill is correct, when the matter is
considered in conjunction with what we are doing in statutory
guidance. Mr.
Hayes: That is a good point, but it is not a very good
point, if I might say so, because we are talking about a pathway. The
sort of advice given to a young person who was not suitably qualified,
in the Minister’s terms, might be about pre-apprenticeship
training, which, once they had gone down a path, might lead to an
apprenticeship. I am not sure that we would not give advice about the
destination as part of giving advice about the
journey.
Jim
Knight: I am sure that that is the kind of matter that
will be well covered by the information in the comprehensive element of
the statutory guidance which we want to see in every school. How those
sorts of pathways, as set out in the qualification strategy last year,
will affect people’s options later on in life as they continue
learning and move into work will be set out in that guidance. I hope
that I have briefly and relatively accurately set out for the Committee
why we think that we have taken the right
decision. Gender
and other equality issues, as explored by the hon. Member for Bristol,
West and by my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Devonport, are
important. At the moment, in terms of the apprenticeship routes, some
apprenticeships are very much dominated by one gender, and the ones
dominated by women tend to be the lower-paid apprenticeship routes. We
have recently been raising the minimum apprenticeship wage to assist
those working in the care sector and hairdressing, for
example. I
hope—it is certainly our intention—that, through the new
information, advice and guidance standard, which will apply to all
local authorities, and through the changes that we are making in the
Bill and through the previous Act, we will raise considerably the
standard of information, advice and guidance for young people. However,
those are not the only things that we are
doing. We
are establishing a network of advocates from among school leaders
through the National College for School Leadership. We are delivering
classroom materials and case studies as part of the Department’s
careers education support programme and making personal, social and
health education, which is where much of the careers education takes
place, a statutory subject. In addition, 800 14-to-19 briefing sessions
are taking place with schools and colleges to explain the options for
16 to 18-year-olds so that there is better information in
the school system as a whole. We are currently reviewing the
information, advice and guidance element of the schools self-evaluation
form in terms of the Ofsted inspection and we are improving the online
guidance and services, which so many young people are now using, to
improve the quality
further. I
was glad that mention was made of the diplomas, which offer routes into
apprenticeship as much as into the full range of higher education
institutions and into
work. The experience so far of those who have been learning through the
diploma route is that we have still got a bit further to go on the
gender of pupils taking options in diplomas, but there are good
opportunities for us to use the engagement offered to learners by their
involvement with diplomas. Those learners are really enjoying the
diplomas. We are getting positive feedback, which in turn can
allow us to challenge things. On the elements of the equality duty,
getting more young people of all genders who want to go on to be
architects, surveyors, estate agents, builders, electricians or
plumbers into the construction and built environment diploma, for
example, is a route into an apprenticeship that would help to break
down some of the
barriers. 2.30
pm Schools
could do more to ensure that young people receive advice about
apprenticeships. That said, there is good evidence of Connexions
offering some success between the autumn of 2002 and 2004. Ofsted
carried out four inspections of 28 Connexions partnerships, and 89 per
cent. of those were rated as satisfactory or better and 60 per cent.
were rated as good or better. Since its inception, Connexions Direct,
the national service, had handled more than 1.3 million contacts from
young people by the end of last year, with around 25,000 young people
now contacting the service. The service is popular and, from assessment
and feedback, the vast majority—92 per cent.—of young
people are satisfied or very satisfied with the quality of service that
they received. We want to do better, so we are including the measure in
the
Bill. Amendment
23 would address some of the points in different ways. I noted that the
hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings did not want to table an
amendment on an all-age careers service, so I shall not take up too
much of the Committee’s time responding to that element of the
debate. Suffice to say, there are differences between the needs of
adults and young people in the issues that they face and the solutions
that they require. There is a difference between an all-age service and
an all-age strategy. We are in the process of developing our all-age
careers strategy so that we can link the common issues, but in terms of
the service, one size does not fit all, and it is important that we
have discrete and articulated services to suit the needs of different
groups in our
society. The
amendment would ensure that when young people receive advice and
guidance, they have a clear understanding of what apprenticeships are
about and what they can mean for developing a career. I am happy to
agree that any advice they receive should cover those points, which
would help young people come to an informed decision about which route
is for them. I shall certainly ensure, as we develop our guidance to
schools later this year, that that is
achieved. A
different interpretation of the amendment might be that it is another
ingenious means by which the hon. Gentleman can perpetuate his
contention that the apprenticeships that we have delivered, and will
continue to deliver, are somehow less than real apprenticeships. That
ground was covered so eloquently and ably by my hon. Friend the
Under-Secretary that I do not propose to go over it again. On the basis
of my assurances, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will, with his
customary good grace and good manners, feel able to withdraw the
amendment.
Mr.
Hayes: It is true that I am immensely well mannered. I
make no comment about grace, because that would be far too
bold.
Mr.
Simon: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would agree that
to describe himself in Committee as immensely well mannered is a little
vulgar.
Mr.
Hayes: I am both well mannered and a little vulgar. That
is because I do not come with the gilded history of the Minister of
State for Schools and Learners—public school, Oxbridge and all
that stuff. I share the antecedents of the hon. Member for Bristol,
West, which is perhaps why I empathise with his remarks about the
importance of giving all young people the best advice, so that we can
feed social mobility by that
means. My
point about independent schools, which the Minister did not fail to
comprehend, but with which he was incapable of empathising, was that if
the wherewithal resides with those who are already disproportionately
advantaged, we will cement social division and inhibit social mobility
unless we redistribute advantage. Advice, information and guidance is
critical to such
redistribution. Much
of what the Minister said was fair, and occasionally good, but it was
certainly not good enough. I do not cite my views—he might take
them to be prejudice and feel that I am partisan on such things.
Instead, I cite the expert witness, Kieran Gordon. He could scarcely
have been more critical of the Bill. I asked:
“Has
the Bill gone far enough on strengthening the mechanism by which
quality independent advice can be offered to young
people?” He
said, in a simple
sentence: “I
do not think it
has.” Similarly,
I asked him whether the kind of careers service that I have advocated
herein would reprofessionalise careers advice as a separate
professional discipline. He said, in an even shorter sentence,
“It would.” He went on to
say: “The
issue we might have with apprenticeships—referencing back to
those schools with sixth forms—is that the young people entering
apprenticeships tend to be the same cadre of young people that the
school wants to attract back in to do A-levels or the 16-to-19 elements
of the
diploma.” He
said that there can be “a conflict of interests”
accordingly. He also said that the Bill does not go far enough in
respect of the
ability “to
promote and make young people aware of
apprenticeships.”—[Official Report, Apprenticeships,
Skills, Children and Learning Public Bill Committee, 3 March 2009;
c. 57, Q155 and
156.] I could
go on. What was clear was that Mr. Gordon’s analysis
was altogether closer to that of the Opposition than that of the
Government.
Jim
Knight: I know that the hon. Gentleman has quoted at
length from what Kieran Gordon said and I am sure that Mr.
Gordon was an excellent witness. However, does he not recognise that
Mr. Gordon did not have the benefit of my excellent
contribution to this debate today, where I have explained in some
detail the interplay between the Education and Skills Act 2008 and the
provision in this Bill?
Mr.
Hayes: As I said in an intervention, Kieran Gordon
referred to the 2008 Act, and although it is certainly true that he
would not have heard the Minister for Schools and Learners
today—unless he had the power of prophecy or something
similar—he understood that the 2008 Act was firmer about this
issue than is the Bill. I think that what he had expected was, as I
indicated earlier, a Bill that mirrored the 2008 Act with a firm
commitment. Let
me put this issue in context. In 2008, a study by YouGov found that
only 24 per cent. of teachers agreed that apprenticeships are a good
alternative to A-levels. That is a far smaller proportion than the same
survey found among parents, for whom the figure was 43 per cent., or
among young people themselves, for whom the figure was 52 per cent.; as
for employers, 55 per cent. felt that apprenticeships were a good
alternative to A-levels. The Skills Commission’s report on
progression through apprenticeships, which will soon be published,
reveals that teachers consistently underestimate the extent to which
young people, parents and employers value apprenticeships. For example,
although 47 per cent. of teachers believe that young people think that
apprenticeships are not a good alternative to A-levels, only 19 per
cent. of young people think that they are not a good
alternative. The
2008 YouGov survey also found that teachers have less knowledge of
apprenticeships than of any other learning route, except for the Welsh
baccalaureate. I know almost nothing about the Welsh baccalaureate, but
I am sure that either the hon. Member for Bristol, West or the
Under-Secretary will be able to enlighten us about it in due
course. That
is why we need this all-age professional career service. The hon.
Member for Bristol, West is right that it needs to be independent, but
it also must have empiricism and offer advice that is not slanted and
gives real emphasis to the vocational pathway. That means talking about
apprenticeships to people who are not yet ready to pursue them, so that
they can understand where they might end up. If we do not articulate a
strong case for apprenticeships at all stages, people will not dream of
an apprenticeship as the outcome that they might
achieve. Young
people start to think about university long before they can go
there—when they enter secondary school, perhaps even earlier. My
own son told me when he was five that he wanted to go to Trinity
college, Cambridge. I said, “Why Cambridge?” He replied,
“Because it is in the fens and you could still read me my
bedtime story and I would be able to come home for my hot
dinners.” That seemed to me as good a reason as any to go to
Cambridge. However, it illustrates that, very early in their lives,
people start to dream of what they might achieve. If we do not make
enough of vocational pathways, those dreams will be slanted very much
by their familiar experience, the social group to which they belong and
the interfaces that they enjoy during their
childhood. The
amendment, as the Minister fairly said, does not go as far as we would
wish. A new clause might do just that. Perhaps we will have a chance to
debate one later on. But the amendment would at least take us further
than the Minister is prepared to go and further down the line that
Mr. Gordon wants us to take. It would take us towards the
elevation of the practical, which lies at the heart of all of my
considerations of this matter. In so doing it would feed social
mobility by adding opportunity to those across society, but
particularly those who are
most disadvantaged. For that reason, and because of our passion for
vocational education, because of our belief in independent, free and
fair advice, and because of our support for the careers profession too,
which we feel has lost out since it was absorbed into Connexions, we
will press this amendment to a
vote. Question
put, That the amendment be
made. The
Committee divided: Ayes 6, Noes
8.
| 
