Employment Training (Hansard, 26 February 1991)

§ 1. Mr. Jack Thompson
To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what measures he will introduce to improve employment training.

§ 12. Mr. Cryer
To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what measures he is taking to increase the level of employment training; and if he will make a statement.

§ The Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Michael Howard)
I announced in November additional flexibilities to enable training and enterprise councils to increase the effectiveness of employment training. I am announcing today that an extra £120 million will be made available to training and enterprise councils in England and Wales and to Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise in Scotland to ensure that employment training can continue to play its full part in helping unemployed people back to work.

§ Mr. Thompson
That announcement does not compensate for the fact that since 1988 £1 billion has been taken out of the training bill. Is it not a national disgrace that quality training, which is one of the cornerstones of the improvements that we might expect to see in the British economy, has been greatly damaged by the fact that so much funding for training has been removed? Is the Secretary of State aware that we are going through a catastrophic time for training and that after the present crisis the British economy will be seriously damaged due to the lack of investment in training not just in the past year or two but for the past 10 years?

§ Mr. Howard
One thing is absolutely clear about these additional resources. In the debate on the autumn statement, the shadow Chancellor reaffirmed that training would not be one of the two immediate priorities for a Labour Government—so what we are devoting to employment training is at least £120 million more than the Labour party would make available.

§ Mr. Cryer
Can the Secretary of State explain how the sale of 51 skillcentres, accompanied by a gift from the Government of £70 million, has improved the availability of training in this country when the activity of the three insider dealers who bought most of the skillcentres has been concerned principally with sacking instructors, selling off freehold sites and selling the valuable machinery and equipment used by the skillcentres to train people? When will the right hon. and learned Gentleman explain what value this audacious taxpayers rip-off is to the people who want employment training?

§ Mr. Howard
The hon. Gentleman persists in making entirely unfounded allegations about the sale of skillcentres. The skillcentres were making a substantial loss. It is clear that they can now provide training much more effectively in the private sector, and that is exactly what they are doing.

§ Mr. Nicholls
Does my right hon. and learned Friend not find it bizarre to be accused by Labour Members of underfunding employment training when that and every other major training initiative introduced by the Government has been attacked and opposed by them from the beginning? Does he agree that it would be more appropriate for them to support employment training instead of trying to supplant our training schemes by calling for the reintroduction of a training levy on employers, bearing in mind how that failed to produce the goods in years gone by?

§ Mr. Howard
I agree with my hon. Friend. Nothing remotely comparable with employment training was available when Labour Members were last in office. They have consistently opposed every training initiative that we have introduced, which makes their claim to be the guardians of training entirely laughable.

§ Mr. Madel
As there is a shortage of people trained in electronics and electronic engineering, will my right hon. and learned Friend ask the training and enterprise councils to make training in that sector of industry a priority, especially as they now have welcome new money?

§ Mr. Howard
My hon. Friend will appreciate that the essence of training and enterprise councils is that they should be able to tailor training programmes to local circumstances in order to equip local people with the skills that they need to fill local jobs. I am sure that, in carrying out that remit, the councils will bear in mind the needs of the sector to which my hon. Friend refers.

§ Mr. Blair
Will the Secretary of State confirm that the £120 million that he has announced is less than a third of the amount that he is cutting from the Department of Employment budget for next year alone? Will he guarantee to save the thousands of training places at risk, the training providers who are going out of business and the training programmes that are being closed? If he will not give that guarantee, are we not justified in saying that the Government, having created unemployment, are now abandoning the unemployed?

§ Mr. Howard
Why does the hon. Gentleman not recognise that his colleague the shadow Chancellor has made it plain that training is not one of the two priorities on which the Opposition would immediately increase spending if they were ever to form a Government? Until we get a commitment about that from the shadow Chancellor, Opposition complaints about funding are entirely unjustified.

§ Sir Anthony Meyer
Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that the welcome improvement in training that he has worked out during his period of office is none the less deficient for those with special training needs, many of whose training schemes will be imperilled by the new system of organisation? Has he any word of comfort for those people?

§ Mr. Howard
I announced some months ago that for the first time those with disabilities would be included in the aim group, which has a high priority in employment training. Those with disabilities now have a higher priority in training than ever before.