|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Table 2: Full-time undergraduate enrolments from the Southampton local authority( 1) by age an d socio-economic classification( 2) , UK higher education institutions, academic years 2003-04 to 2007-08|
|2003 - 04||2004 - 05||2005 - 06||2006 - 07||2007 - 08|
|(1) The table does not include enrolments where the census district of the student cannot be established due to missing or home postcodes.|
(2) This field collects the socio-economic classification of students participating in HE if 21 or over at the start of their course or parental classification if under 21.
(3) Information is not comprehensively collected on the "Never worked and long-term unemployed" category for students. Students who fit this group are usually classed as having missing information.
(4) Covers students whose socio-economic classification was missing or not classified: not classified includes occupations which were inadequately described, not classifiable or unstated..
Figures are based on a HESA standard registration population and have been rounded up or down to the nearest five, so components may not sum to totals.
Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA)
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how many students lived at home while studying in the most recent year for which figures were available. 
Ian Lucas: The latest available information from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) shows that, in the academic year 2007-08, 267,965 UK domiciled full-time students enrolled at UK Higher Education Institutions lived at a parental or guardian home while studying.
In total there were 1,201,975 UK domiciled full-time students enrolled at UK Higher Education Institutions in 2007-08. Therefore, 22 per cent. of full-time students lived at a parental or guardian home while studying.
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how many career development loans were taken out for study (a) in each subject area and (b) at each level of education in each of the last three years for which figures are available. 
Kevin Brennan: Regular management information collected by the Learning and Skills Council on learners taking out career development loans is based on information provided by the high street banks that offer the loans. This classifies loan applications by courses linked to specific sectors, but not by specific subject areas or levels. Data classifying loan applications by subject area and level are available periodically through snapshot evaluation activity. Currently available evaluation does not cover the last three years.
Mr. Breed: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what steps his Department has taken to combat the practice of moving a telephone subscriber's account from one service provider to another without the subscriber's authorisation; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. McFadden: Responsibility for mis-selling lies with the Office of Communications (Ofcom) which is committed to preventing problems related to mis-selling and slamming (where a telephone service is switched to another provider without the customer's knowledge or consent), and has put various safeguards in place to protect consumers from such risks.
In May 2005 Ofcom introduced new rules to combat slamming, which require all providers of fixed-line telecommunications services to residential consumers and small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) to establish, and comply with, a sales and marketing code of practice consistent with Ofcom guidelines. Compliance with the codes is enforceable by Ofcom under the Communications Act 2003 and they can require telecoms providers to remedy the consequences of any breach and can ultimately levy a financial penalty (up to 10 per cent. of relevant turnover) if they do not do so.
In June 2006 Ofcom imposed the maximum financial penalty of 10 per cent. of relevant turnover on Just Telecomms UK Ltd (trading as Lo-Rate Telecom). This decision reflected the serious nature of the contravention. In addition to imposing a financial penalty, Ofcom is also requiring this company to:
pay refunds to affected customers where appropriate;
provide weekly reports to Ofcom on customer contact and refunds paid; and
fully co-operate with, and comply with the adjudications of, the Telecommunications Ombudsman scheme (Otelo).
There are a number of safeguards built into the switching process. Customers must be sent a 'notification of transfer' letter informing them that the switch is happening. There is a 10 day switchover period during which time the customer is able to stop the order going ahead. Typically the customer will receive two letters during the switchover period-one from both their losing and gaining telephone companies.
Ofcom is currently consulting on proposals to strengthen the existing safeguards in this area in order to ensure better protection for consumers and to enable it to take more effective action against providers that break the rules. The consultation closed at the end of May and Ofcom is now reviewing the responses, and expects to publish a statement later in the year.
Mr. Hayes: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how much his Department has spent under the Train to Gain scheme in each year of its operation in each sector of the economy as classified by Sector Skills Council. 
Kevin Brennan [holding answer 3 July 2009]: Train to Gain is a service for employers which puts buying power and information in their hands, giving them better access to a wider range of opportunities for improving the skills of their employees and the productivity of their business. Evaluations show that a wide spread of industry sectors are accessing the service.
The expenditure for Train to Gain is an operational matter for the national Learning and Skills Council (LSC). They do not generally break down information on Train to Gain spend by Sector Skills Council (SSC). However, they are able to provide a breakdown of learner starts by sector and actual costs where possible. I have asked Geoff Russell, the LSC's chief executive, to write to the hon. Member with the relevant information. A copy of his reply will be placed in the Library.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills what proportion of the budget of the Learning and Skills Council for 2009-10 will be used in the training of people with a learning disability. 
Kevin Brennan: As announced in the LSC grant letter, Government investment strategy and LSC statement of priorities (published 18 November 2008), investment in participation for learners aged 16 and over is planned to increase to over £10 billion in 2009-10.
As set out in the same publication, the LSC are committed to continuing development of the provision and support available to learners with learning difficulties and/or disabilities. This will help us realise the vision set out in the learning for living and work strategy that people with learning difficulties and/or disabilities have access to, and experience of, post-16 learning that is
equal to that experienced by their peers without learning difficulties and/or disabilities.
When accessing mainstream LSC-funded further education courses, learners have the option to self-declare as having a learning difficulty and/or disability. It is therefore possible to provide historical, but not projected, spend.
Total spend on self-declared learners was £874 million in 2006-07, and £923 million in 2007-08. This relates to funding for the programme costs of provision delivered through further education colleges. It does not include funding for provision delivered in the workplace, as data are not reported in this way.
In addition, there is a separate budget for specialist LDD provision. This funds learners with LDD learning in independent, specialist providers. For 2009-10, the budget for this provision will be £236 million.
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills how many and what percentage of people aged 16 to 24 were not in education, employment or training in each (a) region and (b) local authority area in the first quarter of (i) 2001 and (ii) 2009. 
Kevin Brennan [holding answer 14 July 2009]: Table 1 shows the number and percentage of people aged(1) 16 to 24 not in education, employment or training by region. These estimates are from the Quarter 1 Labour Force Survey (LFS).
Table 2 shows the number and percentage of people aged(1) 16 to 24 not in education, employment or training by Local Education Authority (LEA). The estimates for 2008 are from the Annual Population Survey (APS) which covers the period January to December, and the estimates for 2001 are from the Annual Local Area Labour Force Survey (ALALFS), the predecessor to the APS, which covers the period March 2001 to February 2002. Due to the small populations of local authorities, the LFS does not have large enough sample sizes to produce reliable estimates for geographies such as LEAs. Therefore we have used the latest APS (2008) which has a larger sample size, and have provided estimates for LEAs as estimates are too unreliable for smaller geographies. Please note that even for regions, sample sizes can be small and these estimates are subject to sampling variability. Numbers have been rounded to the nearest thousand, and typical confidence intervals for these percentages are between 2 and 3 percentage points for regional estimates, and between 3 and 9 percentage points for local authority estimates.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|