STUDENT GRANTS (Hansard, 8 June 1973)

§ LORD BEAUMONT OF WHITLEY
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE (LORD SANDFORD)
My Lords, my right honourable friend has no such proposals in mind. It is an essential principle in the system of grants for undergraduate and comparable courses that parents are responsible for contributing, according to their means, towards the cost of the higher education of their sons and daughters.

§ LORD BEAUMONT OF WHITLEY
My Lords, while thanking the Minister for that reply, is he aware that his honourable friend Mr. St. John-Stevas said on May 15: I undertake to do what I can to help to achieve equity in these rare but difficult cases."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Commons, 15/5/73; col. 1221.] Does the Minister agree that, without breaking the very good principle that there should be grants rather than loans, in these cases it would be suitable to set up a loan machinery; and will he undertake to put that to the Secretary of State?

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, I note the suggestion in the noble Lord's supplementary question, but, as he will know, the effect of introducing a loan system would benefit the better-off parents rather 283 than those with whom we should be concerned chiefly, the less well off, and who have been helped by adjustments in the scale of parental contributions.

§ LORD GARNSWORTHY
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that it is the student who suffers when the parent refuses to help? I gathered from his first reply that the Government have nothing in mind to ease the situation. May I ask the noble Lord whether he will request his right honourable friend to give very serious thought to an extremely unsatisfactory situation that penalises young people who cannot help themselves.

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, as the noble Lord will know, we have taken a number of steps as recently as May 15 to increase student grants. Other steps are coming into force at the beginning of the next academic year to reduce the point at which parental contributions are to begin. That is to deal with the real problems of parents with low incomes. My answer to the question on parents who refuse to make contributions remains as in my original Answer.

§ LORD LEATHERLAND
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord—and I do so as the treasurer of a university; an unpaid post, of course—whether he will forget completely the suggestion that a loan scheme should be introduced. Furthermore, will he arrange for some radical adjustment to be made to the means test whereby the parental contributions are now demanded? I rather gathered that something of that kind was in his mind.

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, yes, I will take note of that point.

§ LORD DAVIES OF LEEK
My Lords, nevertheless, and thanking the noble Lord for his reply, is he aware that sometimes within a family there is a difference of opinion—I saw it once in my lifetime—that could be tragic for a young, ambitious student who gets to university; one parent desiring wholeheartedly the young student to do the university course, and sometimes the father objecting and saying that the lad should be going to work. There is then the problem that, no matter what grants are available, the father himself would not agree. Consequently, the original suggestion of the 284 noble Lord, Lord Beaumont, is to my mind worth while because in my own day, under the Glamorgan County Council, we had no grants such as one has to-day; we had to pay them back when we had earning power.

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, those of us who are fathers are fully aware of what the noble Lord has been saying, but I think, as Members of Parliament, that we are also aware that hard cases make very bad law.

§ BARONESS GAITSKELL
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord how prevalent this thing is—personally I have never heard of such cases before—and whether it is at all widespread. If it is widespread, then it really needs looking into.

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, I am grateful for what the noble Baroness has said, because although it would be idle to deny that there are no cases of this kind, the cases of the parents of low income are much more important.

§ LORD GARNSWORTHY
My Lords, as the noble Lord appreciates, in the case of the relatively few students whose parents refuse to help, this is not a matter of bad law. This strikes me—and I would ask the noble Lord to consider it—as constituting a grave injustice so far as the young person is concerned.

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, that may be so, but it does not justify intruding the law into domestic and family affairs.

§ LORD SEGAL
My Lords, could not the noble Lord consider, even if the problem is not widespread, making these loans available, even on a temporary basis, in cases of genuine hardship so that the careers of the students may not suffer?

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, the question of loans has been looked into before. I will draw the attention of my right honourable friend to the point the noble Lord has made, but my advice at the moment is that the effect of introducing loans would be to benefit the better-off parents and not those worse off.

§ LORD WYNNE-JONES
My Lords, would the noble Lord bear in mind, in considering this matter, that we have a very small percentage of the children of 285 manual workers who go to the university? Very frequently they are unable to go because of the hardship thrown on their parents, who nowadays frequently come within the range of having to make a contribution. Would he bear this in mind, and would he also remember that the students mentioned in this Question are of age, and therefore ought to have the right to decide for themselves whether they go to university, not at the whim of their parents?

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, I bear in mind what the noble Lord has said about the hardship involved in the case of parents on low incomes, but that is quite a different case from the parents who refuse to pay the contribution. There is no evidence that manual workers are more likely to refuse to pay their contribution than any other kind of parent.

§ LORD CHORLEY
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that in some university institutions there are arrangements for making loans from the institution itself to the student who is in difficulties? There certainly were in my time. I wonder whether any real survey of this has been made.

§ LORD SANDFORD
My Lords, as the noble Lord will know, there is the question of loans to postgraduate students, which is being looked into at the moment. Perhaps that is what he has in mind.

§ LORD CHORLEY
My Lords, I am referring to undergraduate students. One of the most distinguished professors in England was helped in this way, and he repaid it all within quite a short time when he had a job.

§ LORD BEAUMONT OF WHITLEY
My Lords, I think this is most unsatisfactory. Is the Minister aware that his answer about not intervening in family affairs really does not apply when the children are over 18—the age of majority? Is he aware that his answer that it would benefit the better-off parents is completely untrue, since if the parents are refusing it will not benefit the parents at all but will benefit only the students? Will he, in view of the number of points which have been made, please press this on his right honourable friend with the utmost urgency?