HC Deb 09 July 1985 vol 82 cc890-1
7. Dr. Godman

asked the Secretary of State for Employment what representations he has received concerning the proposed two-year youth training scheme.

12. Mr. Kenneth Carlisle

asked the Secretary of State for Employment whether he will make a statement on progress in setting up the second year of the youth training scheme.

Mr. Peter Morrison

My right hon. Friend announced on 1 July that he had approved the broad framework of the Manpower Services Commission's proposals for a two-year youth training scheme. These were drawn up after extensive consultations with employers, trade unions, local authorities, education interests and others.

Dr. Godman

In these consultations, has the Minister outlined what steps are to be taken to ensure that the training element in this two-year scheme will be improved, and has he given guarantees that those youth trainees completing a two-year youth training scheme will be offered a job?

Mr. Morrison

As far as the quality of the training is concerned, 20 weeks is the minimum for the two-year scheme. As to the certification, we are working on that so that they have a certificate at the end. As the hon. Gentleman knows, there can be no guarantee of a job at the end of the scheme, but certainly it enhances the job prospects of all the 16 and 17-year-olds who go on it.

Mr. Kenneth Carlisle

The second year youth training scheme will be the greatest help to school leavers seeking a job. However, is my hon. Friend aware that in Germany the two-year scheme costs £3,600 per trainee, the bulk of which is met by the employer? In sharp contrast, our scheme will cost £3,800 per trainee, most of which will be met by the Government. Does he agree that this shows not only the Government's commitment to training but also that we can expect employers to invest far more in training in the future?

Mr. Morrison

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend that the German example of employers making a major contribution is something to be followed, and we have reason to believe that in this country the employers will be making a significant contribution to the two-year youth training scheme.

Mr. Ron Brown

Is it not the case that the YTS is simply a front for cheap labour and a means of keeping down wages in order to establish a new-style Hong Kong in this country? That is the reality of the situation and why so many youngsters in the country realise what the Government are up to. It is a simple con.

Mr. Morrison

The answers to the hon. Gentleman's first three questions are no, no and no. So far as the trainees are concerned, he may be aware that some 84 per cent. think that the scheme is worth while or very worth while, so again he is wrong.

Mr. Colvin

Can my hon. Friend tell the House how many places on the two-year YTS are likely to be made available by the armed forces, and if critics of that form of sponsorship criticise it as being voluntary national service by the back door, can he see anything particularly wrong with that?

Mr. Morrison

My hon. Friend asks how many places there will be in the armed services scheme. It will be of the order of 2,200. It is a totally voluntary scheme, and he may be interested to know that in the year 1984–85 3,400 youngsters applied to go on the scheme.