4 Dec 2007 : Column 1601
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1601
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1601
Tuesday, 4 December 2007.
The House met at half-past two: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Newcastle.
Higher Education: Adult Students
Lord Quirk asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether they will increase the amount of support and encouragement for adults to pursue part-time higher education.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (Lord Triesman): My Lords, in 2006-07, we introduced in England the most generous package of financial support that has ever been offered to part-time students undertaking courses. It included increasing the maximum fee grant by 27 per cent and an above-inflation increase in the income threshold for receiving this support. The number of England-domiciled part-time students receiving grants for fees rose from 34,700 to 42,000 between 2005-06 and 2006-07, which is an increase of 21 per cent. Devolved Administrations are responsible for supporting their own students.
Lord Quirk: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reassuring response, which omitted any question of “but”; namely, that the consultation period on the Secretary of State’s September letter ends this coming Friday. The Minister will recall that, in the vigorous debate last night, there was nigh unanimous support throughout the House for the Government to take a different stand from that proposed by the Secretary of State. How does he propose to respond to the representations made on behalf of Birkbeck, the OU and many other providers, which are protesting about the proposals in the Secretary of State’s 7 September letter?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, the support would have been unanimous last night had I not defended the Government’s position, but I was proud and privileged to do that. The consultation is taking place. As I said last night, I am determined that it should be serious. I am determined that the points made in the debate in your Lordships’ House last night should feed in even in these last few days of the consultation. Some substantive issues were raised and I said that they should be considered properly. I cannot give undertakings about the outcome of the consultation, but I hope that I indicated then, as I do again now, that serious points were made that are well worth considering, and I shall ensure that they are.
Lord Mackay of Clashfern: My Lords, does the Minister agree that it is a happy situation that innovative means of progress in education, both part-time adult
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1602
Lord Triesman: My Lords, I could hardly endorse that thought more. It is not so long since I was Minister for Africa and I have watched these events with the same levels of anxiety as all noble Lords will have experienced. I am delighted that she is back. I hope that this may provide some sort of platform for getting a better understanding. It would be a great disappointment if teachers from the United Kingdom did not teach in other parts of the world. People responsible for the countries in those parts of the world should welcome the teachers whom we send, as they contribute enormously.
Lord Morgan: My Lords, my noble friend will know that in relation to part-time higher education we on these Benches take a particular pride in the Open University, one of the great achievements of any Labour Government, comparable to the National Health Service. I think that my noble friend will acknowledge that the proposed policy on ELQs will cause problems for the Open University, so may I ask him in the most comradely way—contrary to last night—what proposals the Government have in mitigation?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, first, I hope that the House will look with caution at all figures produced about the likely consequences for the Open University. None the less, there is no doubt in my mind that there are consequences for a very great institution. In those circumstances, we need to work carefully with the Open University on a sustainable business model. It is an extremely innovative institution and I have no doubt that it can do a number of things to mitigate the circumstances to great effect. One thing that I am sure of is that we would not want to damage the stability or quality of the provision of the Open University, which I know has been enjoyed at first hand by a good many Members of this House.
Baroness Carnegy of Lour: My Lords, how on earth did it come about that the Government had this idea that was so clearly damaging to the Open University, which, as the Minister said, the Government and the whole nation value? How did it come about that anything so unwise could be promulgated?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, I do not wholly accept the notion that the policy has been unwise. To be clear, I should say that the aim is to increase the amount of money available to those who have never yet been to university or undertaken a first degree at all. Because there is a finite amount of money and it is not possible to extend it indefinitely, the choice was made to move priority from those who were going to study for a second first degree, or something equivalent, to those who had never studied for one at all. That is a decent policy objective, which in many universities will be thought to be appropriate.
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1603
Baroness Howe of Idlicote: My Lords, sadly, I could not be here last night, but I have read the very interesting debate. I declare an interest as an enthusiast for the Open University. I should very much like to have an answer to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Rix, who asked how many women would be disadvantaged by this, given that the vast majority of them are coming back into education and need to upskill. He also wanted to know how many part-timers are women. This policy seems to run totally counter to every other effort on the part of the Government, who have been superb in pursuing equal opportunities for women.
Lord Triesman: My Lords, 57 per cent of the ELQ students are women. As it happens, that is exactly the same proportion as women constitute in the non-ELQ student group. There is exact parity. About 10 million women in the workforce do not have a first higher-level qualification and they are among those whom we have sought to prioritise by this policy move. I hope that it will be accepted that the aim has been to ensure that women with no first qualification of that kind get a realistic prospect of obtaining one.
People Trafficking: Council of Europe Convention
2.44 pm
Lord Judd asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What is their target date for the ratification of the Council of Europe convention on human trafficking; and what progress has been made on their action plan.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, perhaps I should explain and share my disappointment with the House that my noble friend Lord West is not able to answer this Question this afternoon. Unfortunately, he has been detained due to a fatality on a train in front of his own while returning to London from a ministerial visit.
We will ratify the convention as soon as we can as part of our wider strategy to combat this horrific crime. That will take time because of our legal system. Unlike in some countries, there must be full compliance with the convention before ratification. We continue to make progress on all areas outlined in our action plan, most notably in relation to enforcement issues, which has helped to secure 67 convictions to date.
Lord Judd: My Lords, I am very grateful to my noble friend for standing in at such short notice and I thank him for his reply. Will he convey to his colleagues that, with the best will in the world, that reply does not add much to what we were assured of during the passage of the UK Borders Bill through the House last summer. Of course, it is essential—the Government are to be commended on wanting—to insist that we have everything in place to make meaningful success of ratification. I applaud that totally, but the process of getting that action plan together is being seen by
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1604
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I fully concede that my noble friend makes a fair and reasonable point and my ministerial colleagues and I share his frustration about progress on this issue. However, it is right that we put all the measures in place. I would not like to see us in a position where we were criticised for failing to conduct ourselves entirely properly. The Government have been vigorous in ensuring that the right measures are adopted as part of their overall action plan. I know that many noble Lords have congratulated the Government on our support for the Poppy Project and Pentameter 2 and on our rigorous activity in terms of enforcement. We are making progress in those areas.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, the Minister will no doubt confirm, as he said in a letter to those of us who took part in the debate initiated by the noble Lord, Lord Sheikh, that a progress report will be published in March. Will that clearly identify those elements of the action plan which have to be completed in order to enable us to ratify the treaty? With regard to the submission of the implementation plan to the interdepartmental ministerial group scheduled for July, could that not be brought forward to March so that it could be published and discussed at the same time as the progress report?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I understand that the interdepartmental ministerial group meets on a quarterly basis. The next meeting is in January when there will be a review of progress on the moves towards ratification. The benefit of that process is that it is transparent. I also understand that reports are received by the Joint Committee on Human Rights as part of the read-out from the interdepartmental ministerial group.
Baroness Butler-Sloss: My Lords, I declare an interest as a member of a committee examining human trafficking. Do the Government have a clear policy on dealing with missing children? Many of those who come to this country—several thousand in the past five years—are missing and I am not certain whether there is a clear policy yet from the Government about how to deal with that.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I assure the noble and learned Baroness that we have a clear policy in place and I am more than happy to share with her the outline of that strategy. Perhaps I may conduct some correspondence with her which will provide a more thoughtful response that I can give this afternoon.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, my understanding is that this treaty cannot be ratified until some areas of the convention have been amended. What is the timescale for amending those areas of the convention in both primary and secondary legislation and for bringing the proposals to Parliament so that the Government are in a position to ratify the treaty, which I do not think they are at the moment?
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1605
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the noble Baroness makes a good point. We understand that we will have to bring forward legislation to ensure that we can properly comply with and ratify the treaty and slots will be identified for that. The legislation will cover such areas as access to benefits and identification of the person involved. Those issues need to be defined in legislation and they will be part of our legislative timetable.
Baroness Goudie: My Lords, while we have had many Questions on this issue, the same answer is given time after time, both to my colleagues in the other place and here. We are told that the Government will be doing this soon. Will it be in two weeks, two months or two years? As the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, knows, at the same time children are being brought to this country and are being trafficked into other countries. The same applies to women, men and families. We have to take a stand. We are one of the main countries in the EU and we should be taking a lead there and in the Council of Europe. We are not taking a lead and we should be. Will the Minister please tell us when we are going to ratify the convention so that we can take a lead on this matter?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I entirely understand the noble Baroness’s frustration. It is not possible for me to give a specific timetable. I have identified some of the key points. Despite the concern about timetables we should all remember that the most important things are enforcement activity, ensuring that we put the services in place for those who require our protection and that our staff and colleagues are fully trained. It is most important that all those things take place. Operations such as Pentameter are undoubtedly leaders in their field and are recognised as such across Europe.
Housing: Planning Permission
2.52 pm
Lord Greaves asked Her Majesty’s Government:
How many councils in England are subject to a moratorium or severe restrictions on granting planning permission for new housing.
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, no councils are subject to centrally imposed moratoria—by that, I mean centrally imposed blanket bans—or severe restrictions. Her Majesty’s Government are not aware of any areas where there is a locally set moratorium. Some councils have introduced local policies that seek to restrict development within their areas in particular circumstances.
Lord Greaves: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply, which is the same reply we have had to several of these Questions over the past year or two. Such replies meet with astonishment from local authority officers, councillors and, indeed, developers and local people in these local authorities and district councils, of which there is a string across the north of England—for
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1606
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for raising this Question and giving me the opportunity to put on record something which I think will be helpful and may ameliorate some of the local authority astonishment that he described. I believe that there has been a misunderstanding on the part of some local authorities regarding what we are saying about the targets that are set in regional spatial strategies.
The Government have made it clear that we do not expect RSS targets to be ceilings. Taking this alongside planning policy statement 3 on housing, which was published last year, local authorities such as Pendle are now free to adopt a much more flexible approach to housing provision. For example, regional housing strategies are being reviewed, and we hope to publish the one for the north-west next year. If local authorities are not happy with their allocation of 190, for example, in Pendle, they can build more. They can make those decisions taking into account the need for sustainability and with regard to the need for pathfinder regeneration in the region as a whole.
Lord Marsh: My Lords, is the Minister aware that a much greater threat to many parts of the countryside is what are known as Travellers? Do the Government have the same degree of authority in getting some sort of Ordnung on the way in which those people behave? The local people dare not.
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I am aware that some people have concerns about the experience of living close to Traveller communities. That is a long-standing concern, and the Government will be looking at that through the Housing and Regeneration Bill, which has already been debated in the other place. We will have a chance later in the Session to have a serious debate about these issues.
Baroness Seccombe: My Lords, is not the Government’s top-down approach the problem, not the solution? Of course we want rules to protect our green belt, and I wish I were confident that the Government did too. Should not local councils and local people decide where new housing goes? Why is unwanted development still being imposed by government inspectors in gardens in our lovely suburbs while brown land owned by the Government lies derelict?
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I do not accept that interpretation of the planning system in this country. We have worked very hard to develop
4 Dec 2007 : Column 1607
Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords, with the greatest respect, thanking the noble Baroness for her Answer, is she aware that answering—which is not her fault—these excessively long questions totally destroys the essence of what is supposed to be Question Time?
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I appreciate that it is to the advantage of the House to have as many questions answered as possible, but where there are serious misunderstandings about government policy, as we have seen with regard to regional spatial strategies, speaking on behalf of the Government I should have a chance to put important points on the record.
Lord Greaves: My Lords, I think that the Government have overturned policy in one fell swoop in this announcement; perhaps not. Will the Minister make sure that her Government Office officials in the English regions and her planning inspectors are aware of what she has just announced? They are overturning local authority planning decisions on precisely the grounds that I have been talking about.
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: My Lords, I assure the noble Lord that all appropriate offices and officers are properly informed of the Government’s approach to RSS targets. He is highlighting the fact that government policy is moving on in a very important way. We need to make the planning system free up land so that we can see new houses for all those who are suffering because of a lack of affordability and a lack of access to decent homes in a place where they want to live.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |