HC Deb 14 February 1963 vol 671 cc1468-70
20. Mrs. Castle

asked the Minister of Education why Mr. Dinnis of Blackburn, a married student of 21 years of age at present undergoing a three-year teachers' training course, has been classed as dependent on his parents for grant purposes, in view of the fact that he had been earning his own living for nearly two years before taking up training, is receiving no financial help from his parents and has a wife and baby to support.

Mr. Chataway

Under the grant arrangements men students are treated as independent of their parents if they are over 25 before they begin their course or have supported themselves for at least three years.

Mrs. Castle

Does not this case prove how absurd these grant arrangements are? Does the Parliamentary Secretary believe that the right way to get the urgently required teachers is to tell a student that he must be either over 25 before he is married or that he should postpone his training until then? What is the good of the hon. Gentleman talking about the need to get more mature teachers in training when the Government are treating existing trainees in this way? My Question refers to a man who has been supporting himself for two years, who is now married, and has a baby 11 months old. Will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider these grant arrangements in the light of experience, as his predecessor agreed to do when these Regulations were first discussed?

Mr. Chataway

I will certainly undertake to look at this matter again, but this matter was endorsed by the Anderson Committee and it has been the practice that dependants' allowance should be paid only to students who are themselves treated as independent.

Mrs. White

Does the Parliamentary Secretary recognise that the Government quote the Anderson Committee when it suits them and differ from it when they decide differently? Therefore, they cannot quote it in aid on this matter. Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that we had the strongest representations on this from the National Union of Students and other bodies? The present Regulations, with their present age limit, are quite unrealistic and out of keeping with modern trends. Will he ask his right hon. Friend to look seriously at this again?

Mr. Chataway

I have said that the point will be considered, but, whether one quotes the Anderson Committee always or sometimes, the fact remains that this body of people came to the conclusion that this was the right arrangement.

Mrs. Castle

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment.