HC Deb 09 June 1998 vol 313 cc895-8

'.—(1) A relevant institution in England or Wales shall not, when making available (or offering to make available) educational services, do so under a name which includes the word "university" unless the inclusion of that word in that name is—

  1. (a) authorised by or by virtue of any Act or Royal Charter, or
  2. (b) approved by the Privy Council for the purposes of this section.

(2) A person carrying on such an institution shall not, when making available (or offering to make available) educational services through the institution, use with reference either to himself or the institution a name which includes the word "university" unless the inclusion of that word in that name is authorised or approved as mentioned in subsection (1).

(3) Subsection (1) or (2) applies where the educational services are made available, or (as the case may be) the offer to make such services available is made, in any part of the United Kingdom.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (1) or (2) the inclusion of the word "university" in any name shall not be taken to be authorised by or by virtue of a Royal Charter relating to a university by reason of any provision of the Charter with respect to—

  1. (a) the affiliation or association of other institutions to the university, or
  2. (b) the accreditation by the university of educational services provided by other institutions.

(5) In approving the inclusion of the word "university" in any name for the purposes of this section the Privy Council shall have regard to the need to avoid names which are or may be confusing.

(6) The Privy Council's power of approval under subsection (1) or (2) shall not be exercisable in a case where the inclusion of the word "university" in the name in question may be authorised by virtue of any other Act or any Royal Charter.

(7) In this section— relevant institution" means an institution within the further education sector or the higher education sector as defined by section 91(3) or (5) of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992; university", in the context of the reference in subsection (4) to a Royal Charter relating to a university, has the meaning given by section 90(3) of that Act.'.—[Dr. Howells.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Dr. Howells

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this, it will be convenient to discuss the following: Government new clause 9—University college, etc., not to be treated as university.

Government amendments Nos. 74 and 81.

Dr. Howells

The new clauses and amendments implement recommendations of the Dearing report on higher education. The Dearing committee recommended that the names and titles used by higher education institutions should be clear and consistent. At present, too many institutions are using unofficial titles that have not been properly authorised and have no clear meaning, which can be confusing to students and others. There is currently no clear statutory control over such unofficial titles.

The Dearing committee also believed that there was a place for a new category of "university college" for higher education institutions that fall short of full university status but have the power to award their own degrees. The Government accepted that recommendation, but there are some technical obstacles to implementing it under the present legislation in England and Wales.

We have decided to tackle both those problems by the new clauses and amendments. New clause 7 proposes a statutory duty on institutions in the further and higher education sectors in England and Wales not to supply or offer educational services under a name including the word "university" unless that name has been properly authorised. For that purpose, a name can be authorised by, or under, any statute or royal charter. Existing properly authorised names will not be affected.

To cover any cases to which the existing powers of authorisation do not apply, the Privy Council will, under the new clause, have an additional power of approval. For the avoidance of any dispute on that point, a name will not be regarded as authorised by, or under, a royal charter just because the charter allows a university to make arrangements for affiliation, association or accreditation of other institutions. In our view, that does not, in itself, entitle a university to authorise other institutions to change the names under which they present themselves to the public to include the word "university".

The amendments create a statutory prohibition but not a criminal offence. Injunction proceedings may be brought in the courts to enforce the prohibition.

New clause 9 deals with a technical obstacle to the approval of the proposed new "university college" title in England and Wales. It does not affect the position of University college, Oxford or University college, London. The provisions cover institutions in England and Wales only, because that is where the problems exist. However, institutions in England and Wales invite applications from students throughout the United Kingdom, so the statutory prohibition of unauthorised names applies to the offer of educational services throughout the UK.

Dr. Brian Iddon (Bolton, South-East)

I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware that a few institutions in England have been awarding their own degrees and higher degrees without using the title "university" or "university college". I draw to his attention the Bolton institute of higher education, which has been seeking university status since 1991. I understand that a decision will be made in the next few weeks after a long campaign that has been particularly active recently. I remind my hon. Friend that we are looking forward to a positive decision, and if we receive one, the town of Bolton will go wild.

5 pm

Dr. Howells

The thought of Bolton going wild is almost too much. I congratulate my hon. Friend and his colleagues on their sterling work on behalf of the Bolton institute of higher education. They have lobbied long and hard, and with good reason. As my hon. Friend has just told us, the matter is currently under consideration by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment, who will inform the institute of his conclusion soon.

We intend that the provisions that facilitate the approval of university college titles will be brought into operation quickly. The statutory prohibition on using unauthorised titles will be brought into operation after a reasonable interval to allow institutions to take it into account.

The new clauses and amendments will provide a clarification of the names and status of higher education institutions which has been needed for some time, and I commend them to the House.

Mr. Phil Willis (Harrogate and Knaresborough)

I read the new clauses and amendments with interest, particularly the proposal that institutions that use the title "university" without proper authorisation will be outlawed. The university for industry is one of the Government's innovations. How do they propose to get around that—or are we to assume that the university for industry will be no more?

Dr. Howells

The university for industry essentially does not exist, except as a pilot in Sunderland, where some superb work has been done by a combination of partners, including Sunderland university, Gateshead further education college and Sunderland training and enterprise council. They have used that as a working title. The university for industry is under consideration and has a pathfinder prospectus, but it has no legal standing. We shall examine its status in due course, but at the moment it is not a problem.

Mr. Green

The Opposition welcome the move to clear up any confusion in the exact status of our universities, as that could cause great damage both to students who may be misinformed and to reputable institutions. I am delighted that the Government are following the recommendations of the Dearing committee. Would that they had done so in other parts of the Bill.

Mr. Dalyell

Some years ago, I had a constituency case involving a person from Singapore who felt deceived in respect of the quality and standing of a particular educational establishment in Britain. Is the new clause really about fraudulent presentations, or presentations that are not quite what they are made out to be, affecting foreign nationals?

Dr. Howells

The intention is not to give the impression that the sector is run through with fraudulent claims about the quality of courses delivered. There is a great deal of confusion. My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton, South-East (Dr. Iddon) has just mentioned one excellent institute, and there are many others. Since the incorporation of higher education institutions and the intensification of competition for students, there is a great temptation for higher education institutions to assume that they can throw the cloak of a university across their shoulders. There has to be a guarantee of the quality of education offered by those institutions, and that is the primary reason for the new clause. However, where there are fraudulent claims, the Government clearly have a role to investigate them thoroughly and to ensure that justice is done.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.

Forward to