HC Deb 15 February 1977 vol 926 cc240-1
11. Mr. Newton

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is her latest estimate of the percentage of students who do not receive the assessed parental contribution; and what she estimates the shortfall in such contributions to be in money terms both in total and as an average per student.

Mr. Oakes

According to a sample survey undertaken for my Department in 1974–75, about a half of all students with mandatory awards in Great Britain received less than the full value of their award because parents did not pay all of the assessed contribution. The total shortfall was about £16 million, or £90 per student underpaid. I would remind parents of the need to pay the contribution in full.

Mr. Newton

Does the Minister agree that those figures confirm that the scheme is in danger of becoming a shambles and is unfair to students and to parents? Since there is agreement in principle between both sides of the House on the abolition of these contributions, and since middle income groups need some consideration in present circumstances, will she try to persuade her right hon. and hon. Friends to do something about this scheme soon?

Mr. Oakes

As child tax allowances are progressively phased out, parental contributions will be reduced correspondingly. If we were to phase out the scheme or abolish it at present, it could cost, in public expenditure terms, £120 million; or, if child tax allowances were abolished at the same time, the estimated cost would be £55 million on top of present public expenditure requirements.

Mr. Gerry Fowler

Will my hon. Friend, in the course of the present triennial review—which I hope will reach a conclusion earlier than did some of its predecessors—re-examine some of the proposals for beginning to phase out parental contributions, such as reducing the age of dependence, which could encourage work experience and make a contribution to bridging the gap between education and industry?

Mr. Oakes

My hon. Friend will know that the negotiations on the triennial review are in progress, and among the various suggestions we are examining the one that he mentioned.

Dr. Boyson

Is the Minister aware that recent surveys by students indicate that 73 per cent. of students do not have the full grant made up by their parents? Is he aware of the deep resentment among parents and students on this aspect, following the reduction in the age of majority to 18? Does he agree that when circumstances are easier we should move to phase out parental contributions, bearing in mind that where the contribution is not paid it is the student rather than the family who suffers?

Mr. Oakes

I agree that we must examine that matter. Both sides of the House are united on that point. All I was saying was that at a time when we are looking for financial restraints on public expenditure, now and the immediate future is not the time to tackle the problem.

Forward to