§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Burns.]
2.40 pm§ Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark and Bermondsey)It is rare to take part in item 47 of the day's business, and it is a good thing that some of the other items did not take too long. I am glad to be given the opportunity to raise—not for the first time in my 12-plus years in the House—the state of the youth service.
I welcome the Under-Secretary to his place, although I gather that he is deputising for his newly appointed colleague who has joined the merged Department from the Department of Employment and has the youth service as one of his responsibilities. I, for one, welcome the merger of the two Departments, as a move in the right direction. I have reservations about the youth service's role in that Department, and I shall start by flagging up a traditional failure of the Government in that respect.
Before I arrived on the planet—although I think that you were here, Mr. Deputy Speaker—the Education Act 1944 went through Parliament. [Interruption.] You were not here in Parliament, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but you were on the planet, whereas I was far from even being planned. There was a discussion at that time of the role that the youth service should have within the education service. The reality is that the status of the youth service has remained the same since then, although attempts have been made to amend education legislation to strengthen it.
The Government's wording is that the youth service exists to
promote the planned personal and social education of young people aged 11–25".The youth service is responsible for that part of the educational provision that is not obligatory or core school provision—it provides the non-school alternative, but it is also a supplement and a complement. Large numbers of young people take advantage of the service. Figures show that about 20 per cent. of young people aged between 13 and 19 are currently participating in the youth service, and about 60 per cent. of young people at some stage make use of the youth service. That adds up to a figure of about 2. 7 million. Up and down the country—whether in local authority youth clubs or in the voluntary sector—the youth service is busy supporting, developing and securing young people's progress from childhood into adulthood, and supplying them with many of the personal skills that they would not learn elsewhere.I have some knowledge of the subject. Two things drove me into politics, and moving to Southwark was the cause of both of them. One was the incompetence of the Greater London council in housing people around Burgess park as it developed, while the other was the lack of opportunity for young people in inner south London. I found myself—not for the first or last time—working as a youth leader in a youth club, and I saw how valuable the youth service was in playing a part in the triangle of home, formal education and the world.
Young people can learn many things at home, but home is not the place where they want to be doing the learning. For many, it is not school either. Of course, they both have their role, but the place where young people can most effectively develop is somewhere where they can be 1286 with their peer group, where they feel that they are not there under compulsion, where they are not under parental authority and where they can develop their skills in a structured way that responds to their needs. That work has been so well carried out by so many for about 50 years.
The first comment that I put to the Minister to pass on to his colleague concerns ministerial responsibilities. Even after the latest Government reshuffle, they have failed to do some important Government reordering. I hope that even the Conservative Government see this as a good idea that should be implemented before the next election, even though, by doing so, they would steal yet another bit of clothing from the Liberal Democrats in terms of policy.
On the Government Front Bench for the previous debate, we saw the new Minister for Social Security and Disabled People. Over several Administrations, the Government have accepted that there is a case for a Minister based in one Department having general responsibility for issues of concern to disabled people. It would give great encouragement and reassurance, and it would be an effective step, if the Government created a Minister for youth.
I do not argue for a separate Department—that is not credible—but I argue for a Minister with particular responsibility for young people, logically based in the Department for Education and Employment, with a unit of civil servants to back him up. The Minister would be heard as the voice for young people in Government. He could make sure that all Departments across the spectrum responded to the concerns of young people. He could provide a place to which young people could come to express their concerns. Ministers responsible for the youth service have sometimes been not merely not high profile but so low profile that one hardly knew that there was one. We really must beef up the way in which the Government are seen to support young people in general and the youth service in particular.
The second comment that I put to the Minister is that there is a good case for changing the 1944 legislation and giving greater statutory security to the work that the youth service does. Of course one can argue that the youth service is different in character and style from the formal education that young people have to go through. The Government have just announced the extension of education to four-year-olds. We welcome that. It will eventually come to three-year-olds. It will be available to all. The youth service is available to all, but it would feel more secure if it were on a statutory basis.
To put the youth service on a statutory basis is not enough. There is a third hugely important element. On Wednesday this week, there was a lobby of this place by young people in the youth service and youth workers, organised by the Community and Youth Workers Union. It had been organised for weeks. There was a rally at Central hall. The hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Kilfoyle) introduced a ten-minute Bill, which I support, to put the youth service on a statutory basis.
The issue at the forefront of the minds of people who took part in the lobby was not that they wanted a statutory service, although youth workers and many of us who know the arguments would argue for that. The issue was the huge cuts that they have seen in the budget of the youth service, particularly in urban areas. They wanted more financial security. One of the arguments in favour of a greater level of security for the youth service is that it would provide greater security of funding. That point 1287 bridges on to my third point. We really must do more to provide financial long-term security for not only the youth service provided by local education authorities but that provided by other agencies in the voluntary sector.
The Government have been criticised, and there is much public concern, about the relative cuts in the education budget for next year. My colleagues and I have made no bones about the fact that, as a party, we are still committed to an extra £2 billion on education expenditure, even if it means increasing income tax by a penny in the pound. The youth service is one service that needs more money, especially in areas where that has been cut, because of its important work for and with that age group.
A few weeks ago, I visited Dorset to investigate youth service provision. Excellent, out-of-school youth education is undertaken in Weymouth and other places in that rural county. I know of the hugely important role that organised, non-formal education plays in urban Britain, such as in Bradford, where there have been disturbances recently and Luton, which is slightly less urban. It plays a role in managing, challenging and developing the energies of young people and ensuring that, rather than feeling marginalised and alienated, they feel that they have a role to play.
In a country with very high unemployment, a high incidence of absence of skills among young people and a huge sense of alienation, the youth service plays a vital role. Feelings of alienation from the political process are probably as great as ever among young white men, let alone among young white women and young non-white men and women. One criticism of the service is that it is seen as a palliative for dealing with youth crime. Most crime is committed by young people, but it is normally committed by young people on young people.
Happily, the fear of crime is worse than the reality, and we must try to reassure older people on that point. It is also true, however, that although the youth service does not exist to keep young people off the streets and from turning into criminals, in reality, it is far more likely that young people will become involved in criminal activity if their time is not occupied profitably, particularly if they do not have a job or a skill.
The Government do not accept the direct correlation between unemployment and crime. They do not accept the Coopers and Lybrand report results and conclusions. However, it is the general view of those who work in education and the youth service and of parents and the police that there are links. The higher the unemployment and deprivation and the poorer the training, the more likely it is that young people will become involved in criminal activity. In urban areas, therefore, a really effective youth service, which will channel and develop young people separately, is even more important.
Towards the end of last month, the Government made an announcement about the future of the National Youth Agency—a quango that they set up a few years ago to take overall responsibility for channelling funds and backing up the youth service. It was feared that the agency might disappear, but it has not. The Government announced that they wanted to change its status and it will continue, but not as a quango. I hope that the Minister will consider this point.
There are several months before the response to the report is concluded and the real danger of that proposal, which is in general welcome, is that it will allow the Government to wash their hands more cleanly of the 1288 youth service and to tell local authorities that it is up to them, if they want to fund that general organisation to service them, to do so. If the Government get rid of capping later this year, as I have a hunch that they will, local authority budgets will be strapped and the Government must take a lead. They must state the importance of the youth service and say that the non-formal education of young people, to give them skills, abilities and self-esteem, should continue.
I urge the Government to continue to take an interest in the National Youth Agency, and to consider greater funding for the youth service, statutory and voluntary. It is much more cost-effective to do so. For example, the cost per young person in the youth service is much less than the cost of one crime committed by a young person. Indeed, it is not even comparable. I also urge the Government to look again at whether they could secure the youth service in order to guarantee the delivery of the product by legislative requirement.
Finally—I hope that this will be the most seriously pursued—I urge the Government to provide a voice in Government for young people and their services before the next general election. They have done it for disabled people and it could be done with merit for young people. The youth service would then be the direct responsibility of the Minister concerned and the profile of both the youth service and young people would be raised.
I hope that I have put the case in a non-confrontational and positive way. Hundreds of thousands of people feel that the youth service is hugely valuable. They look to the Government to make it much clearer that the Government share that view.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Mr. Robin Squire)As the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) said, I am standing in for the Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment, my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-East (Mr. Paice), who is responsible for the youth service. I welcome the tone in which the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey delivered his speech and I will ensure that all his comments are brought to the attention of my hon. Friend the Minister as it is right and proper that he should consider them in depth.
While it is not a normal thing for a Minister to do in responding to an Adjournment debate, this morning I made two trips to the hon. Gentleman's constituency. I should hastily explain that I was travelling to and from the Prime Minister's launch of the sports initiative in Millwall. I shall not strain your patience, Mr. Deputy Speaker, by speaking at length about that initiative this afternoon. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will join me in recognising that its implications for young people in encouraging a wider take-up of sport are significant and read across some of the subjects that he raised.
I also pay tribute to the hon. Gentleman—I hope that he is not too embarrassed by a second tribute—to the long interest that he has taken in youth matters, both before he came to the House and during his parliamentary career. I think that I am right in saying—the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that after a time one's memory fades—that in 1979–80 I sponsored the Youth Service Bill. So certain issues tend to recur from time to time.
1289 I noted the concerns of the youth workers who took part in the lobby of Parliament on 12 July, as did my hon. Friend the Minister responsible. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the merger between the Department for Education and the Department of Employment. It is an exciting merger. Clearly, these are very early days but, in time, the merger will impact across the entire age range in the country. If one had to give the age range that would, in time, logically benefit most from that merger, I suspect that it is the 14 to 19 age range. Significant attention will no doubt be paid to that age range in the next few years and I trust that that will have important benefits for young people.
Just a month ago, the Minister formerly responsible for the youth service, my hon. Friend the Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell), now Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, reaffirmed the Government's support for the youth service in his speech at the Keele conference on partnership in the delivery and management of the youth service. We are happy to support the partnership between local authorities and the voluntary sector, which are the main providers. Increasingly, however, central Government and outside agencies are dealing with young people.
The Department has an enabling role in relation to the youth service, discharged principally through the National Youth Agency. It directs funding to local education authorities under the "Grants for Education, Support and Training" programme and funds more than 60 national voluntary organisations. Total funding this year will be well over £8 million. Our support for the voluntary sector recognises its role as a key player in the youth service. As a mark of that continuing commitment, a further three-year scheme of grants has been approved to take over from the present scheme when it comes to an end next March.
Our plans for the future of the National Youth Agency were recently announced by my predecessor. It is clear from the review of the NYA that its status and accountability needed to change. It needed to reflect its true position as a body primarily supporting local youth services. Its locally focused work has assumed a much greater significance than was expected when it was first established. It is right that it should become accountable to local providers for that work.
We shall be giving local authorities a major stake in the agency's future. We shall shortly be transferring £1.1 million to them to fund and manage the agency's work in support of local voluntary and statutory youth services. That will be an excellent opportunity for them. Local authorities are examining the arrangements for the future status of the agency. We are confident that they will make good use of the funds transferred so that the NYA continues to support local youth services.
We have made it clear to local authority associations that new arrangements for the agency should reflect the important role of the voluntary youth service sector. We anticipate that support for both the LEA sector as well the voluntary sector will be strengthened by the changes. We are taking steps to ensure that the quality of training received by youth workers is enhanced. We are continuing funding for the agency's work in overseeing the quality of youth work training. That funding will be included in the sum that we are transferring to local authorities, and 1290 this should give them the opportunity to take a longer-term view of appropriate qualifications for youth workers. They will also need to take into account the possible development in this area of national vocational qualifications.
The hon. Gentleman referred to the speech made earlier in the week by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Kilfoyle) in support of his ten-minute Bill. The Bill was sponsored by Labour Members but I think that I am right in saying that it has the support of the Liberal Democrat party. I am entitled to ask, "What would the Bill achieve for the youth service?" My answer is, very little. The legal basis for the youth service, if it was in doubt, is not in doubt now. The Education Acts of 1944 and 1992 already place a duty on local education authorities to secure the provision of a youth service. That was relatively recently confirmed by the courts. The courts recognised that each LEA is allowed considerable discretion in how it delivers the service. In fairness, as in a range of other services, there are variations in the nature of the service delivered.
That leads me to the funding and delivery of the youth service. As I have said, it is a matter for each LEA to set its own priorities within its resources. It is not for central Government to determine how local authorities should spend their money. I submit that the local authorities would not want it otherwise. I note claims that LEAs' youth service budgets have been affected by tight local authority spending settlements. As I think everyone in the House knows, the settlement for the current year represented a 1.1 per cent. increase over 1994–95.
There have been scare stories in the past about the effect of past grant settlements on the youth service that have turned out not to be true. Let us consider briefly the trends. Levels of funding in individual authorities can vary from year to year. Let us take a slightly longer view. Between 1990–91 and 1993–94, expenditure on the youth service increased by 13 per cent. in cash terms and 1 per cent. in real terms. That is not the only money that LEAs receive. The youth service also benefits from the single regeneration budget, as it did from the programmes that the SRB replaced.
As a fellow London Member, I would be aware of concerns that the hon. Gentleman would have about funding in the London area. Transitional funding by the Department for the voluntary youth service will come to an end in March 1996 after six years. It was originally intended to run for three years to help voluntary organisations to adjust to funding after the abolition of the ILEA. Obviously, the grant cannot go on indefinitely. The voluntary youth service in London must now look to the London boroughs and the London boroughs grants committee for support.
The funding of the youth service in London local education authorities is still much higher per capita compared with the rest of the country. For example, for young people aged 13 to 19 years the inner London boroughs spend about two and a half times the national average on their youth service. It is interesting to consider the demands in the light of the recent survey by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys on youth service participation. The Department commissioned that survey, which estimates that the youth service reached 63 per cent. of young people in the 13 to 19 age group at some time in their lives. That is about 2.7 million young people, which is a significant number.
1291 Participation in the youth service is highest among 11 to 15-year-olds, at 31 per cent., and declines sharply after the age of 17. Only 4 per cent. of 18 to 25-year-olds take part in youth service activities. The survey shows that the youth service has to compete with young people's leisure activities and with other organised activities and pursuits. There is no clear evidence that a lack of facilities has caused a decline in participation.
The Government have encouraged participation in the youth service through the youth action scheme. A total of £10 million has been spent over three years on 60 projects in 28 LEAs to develop new kinds of provision for young people who are not normally attracted to the traditional youth service. As the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey said, some of them may be at risk of drifting into crime. Young people will have the opportunity to learn to take responsibility for themselves and to make informed choices for the future. A number of innovative and successful approaches have been developed and good work was reported in a recent Ofsted report. The scheme is being evaluated and a report will be presented in August 1996.
The hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey mentioned disturbances last weekend in Luton and more recently in Leeds. The evidence from similar disturbances in the past has not demonstrated that they have been caused or exacerbated by a lack of facilities. Bedfordshire's expenditure on its youth service has increased substantially in recent years—by 15 per cent. in real terms between 1990–91 and 1993–94.
There is a philosophical flavour to this, but my experience, which may be shared by the hon. Gentleman, is that most of those who claim that they have nothing to do have nothing up top. They have chosen to ignore masses of books, places to visit, physical activities, recreational pursuits, self improvement and a wide range of activities that many other people have discovered and which many more will discover in future. Those who claim that it is simply a matter of providing more facilities have not got to the heart of the problem. I do not accuse the hon. Gentleman of taking that view.
1292 We recognise that a good education is not just academic achievement: it is also about encouraging good citizenship and a community spirit and about helping others less fortunate than ourselves. Volunteering is one good way of learning and understanding how to play a meaningful role in society. We have a national strategy for encouraging and developing volunteering and it is set out in the report which my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary launched in June. It is entitled "Make a Difference: an outline volunteering strategy for the UK", and one of the key aims of that strategy is to encourage and enable people to become and remain volunteers. The education service is ideal for providing volunteering opportunities and nurturing volunteers, as already happens with adults.
Schools and colleges represent an important volunteering resource. An enormous variety of work aimed at developing a sense of community and shared values is already undertaken in schools, and many colleges have an active volunteer movement. Young people have the capacity to respond positively to challenges and they respond best when they feel that they have a stake in society and in their own future. They can best be served through actions that address specific issues rather than being treated as some sort of minority group, however important.
Any definition of youth is arbitrary, although I no longer seek to suggest that 51-year-olds come under that definition. Young people are not a separate identifiable group in society. Their needs and circumstances differ. Someone of 25 who is married with children has little in common with a 15-year-old who is still at school. Where a specific area such as youth crime is identified, we are prepared to target young people directly, and there are many examples—
§ The motion having been made after half-past Two o'clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
§ Adjourned accordingly at nine minutes past Three o'clock.