§ 6. Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion)If she will bring forward proposals to reintroduce student grants. [40724]
§ The Minister for Lifelong Learning (Margaret Hodge)Our review of student finance is considering a number of options. We shall make an announcement on the outcome of the review when it is complete and will consult on proposals for change.
§ Mr. ThomasI thank the Minister for that helpful reply. Will she accept that the decision to reintroduce student grants in Wales was triggered by an independent report that clearly showed that poorer students were not accessing higher education in Wales and that maintenance grants needed to be reintroduced? I cannot believe that the situation can be very different in England. Does not the Minister think that equity demands a maintenance system for poorer students in England and does not the Barnett formula and the decision by the National Assembly of Wales also have an implication for her Department?
§ Margaret HodgeI am surprised by that contribution because the strength of devolution is that the National Assembly can and does take decisions that differ from those taken by this Parliament. I would have thought that the hon. Gentleman would support that. I wish that 1007 ensuring that more people access our higher education system was as simple as introducing student grants. The issue is much more complicated and is equally about raising the attainment of young people in schools, keeping them in school and raising their aspirations so that they see university as an option for them.
§ Mrs. Anne Campbell (Cambridge)My hon. Friend will be aware that there are many students from low-income backgrounds in my constituency, especially those studying at Anglia polytechnic university. Those students are finding it a struggle. Many work such long hours that it impacts on their studies. Could she make it clear to the House that the Liberal Democrat campaign to abolish tuition fees has no effect on poorer students because they do not pay tuition fees? However, in the review of student finance, will she look sympathetically at the introduction of maintenance grants for students from low-income backgrounds?
§ Margaret HodgeI thank my hon. Friend for drawing the House's attention to the fact that half of our students pay no fees and only a third pay the full fee. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said, the full fee barely covers a quarter of the actual tuition cost and the rest is met by Government. The purpose of the review of student finding is to ensure that debt, or the fear of debt, does not prevent people—especially those from low-income backgrounds—from going to university. We will have that at the centre of our concerns.
§ Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)Has the Minister studied the survey undertaken by UNITE, a company that provides accommodation for students? The poll was carried out by MORI and involved some 1,600 students. It drew attention to growing student debt and the increase in part-time working by students, especially those from low-income families. What is the Government's reaction and what response will they make?
§ Margaret HodgeI thank the hon. Gentleman for drawing attention to that survey, because it also said—I hope that he does not mind me quoting some figures at him—that more than 90 per cent. of those involved believed that their university education was worth while, 86 per cent. enjoyed university, 88 per cent. were happy with their lives and 86 per cent. were optimistic about their future. So the survey gave a balanced view. It is true that more students—about half—now work part time and we need to get the balance right between supporting themselves through part-time work and continuing their studies. It is also true that average debt on leaving university is going up, although not as much some predicted. One of the reasons for that is the greater generosity of the loan scheme compared with the scheme that was in place under the hon. Gentleman's Government.
§ James Purnell (Stalybridge and Hyde)Will my right hon. Friend reassure the House that the key criterion being considered in the review of student finance is the 50 per cent. target? Does she agree that in working out how we can reach that target the most important factor is raising the number of people staying on after 16 and that, therefore, in considering the priorities for funding we also have to think 1008 about education maintenance allowances? Those are already making a big difference in my constituency and need to be extended further around the country.
§ Margaret HodgeI completely concur with my hon. Friend's important points. The rate of young people staying on in full-time education and training after the age of 16 is very poor. If we cannot increase that rate—on which our 14 to 19 agenda is focused—we will not build the skills that are needed to be successful in the economy. One of the most effective levers that we have so far identified for supporting an increase in participation after 16 has been the introduction of the education and maintenance allowance. Over 5 per cent. more students have stayed on at 16, and even more have remained in education at 17 and gained achievements. We will build on that and bear it in mind as we determine how to move forward on student funding.