HL Deb 12 March 1973 vol 340 cc94-108

7.10 p.m.

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND SCIENCE (LORD BELSTEAD)

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Belstead.)

House in Committee accordingly.

[The LORD CRENFELL in the Chair.]

Clause 1 agreed to.

LORD GARNSWORTHY moved Amendment No. 1: After Clause 1 insert the following new clause:

Code of guidance

".—(1) The Secretary of State shall prepare a code for the purposes of this Act and it shall be the duty of the Local Authorities to have regard to that code in making the arrangements for work experience under the provisions of section 1 of this Act. (2) The code shall include practical guidance for Local Authorities, Organisations of Workers and employers in making arrangements for work experience under the provisions of section 1 of this Act. (3) The code and any change in the code shall be contained in an Order made by Statutory Instruments and may be varied or revoked by a subsequent Order so made. (4) Before making an Order under this section, the Secretary of State shall consult the representatives of the Local Authorities, Teachers Organisations, Organisations of Workers and Organisations of Employers.

The noble Lord said: I beg to move to insert the new clause set out in the Marshalled List after Clause 1. The Amendment standing in the names of my noble friend Lady Phillips and myself is intended to ensure that this measure, which met with such a warm welcome at Second Reading, will succeed in its aims. I thought that the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, put it very well when he explained on Second Reading that "work experience" is a term. used in a general sense to describe a range of activities undertaken by pupils as part of the process of learning about the adult world within the context of general education." [OFFICIAL REPORT, 26/2/73; col. 361.] Again when he was replying to the debate at column 375, he said: Work experience schemes are regarded as part of the general curriculum of the school, with the intention of showing pupils the relevance to adult life of their studies at school.

I have no quarrel with such statements; indeed, I welcome them for their clarity. What we must secure is that such aims are understood and accepted by all concerned in the service of education, and indeed by all those who may be called upon to help in giving meaning to this very term "work experience". I say that because there are those who regard work experience as leading to a vocational commitment, and indeed some who regard it as being part of the process of vocational training. The noble Lord's observations seem to me to have established the aim as being clearly educational and not vocational. If it be otherwise, then I should want to emphasise what my noble friend Lady Phillips said in the same debate, at column 366: In my humble opinion, vocational training should come after children leave school.

I do not know why on that occasion she expressed herself with humility, because I am sure that she was right. Indeed, if the aims of the Bill had been different than as expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, it would have met with considerable opposition. However, fortunately we are agreed. What we all want is to do all we can to keep the exercise on the right lines.

The noble Lord, Lord Belstead, said at column 365 that it was the Government's intention, to issue guidance to schools and education authorities about the organisation of work experience schemes, about the safeguards which should be applied and about the need for careful consultation with those who will be asked to co-operate in carrying them out.

In the course of her remarks my noble friend asked whether it would not be possible to have a code of practice, and both she and the Minister commented on the reservations of the Trades Union Congress in regard to work experience schemes such as this Bill anticipates. I believe that this Amendment, which follows her suggestion, could be very helpful. I cannot commit anybody, but I believe it to be the right approach. Such a code will make clear the purpose of the measure. It could, I think, overcome the fears, the legitimate apprehensions, that it will be diverted from its intended purpose. And, by bringing into consultation not only local authorities and teacher organisations, but also organisations of workers and employers before any order is made setting out the code, it can secure the all-round good will and co-operation essential to the ends we all desire.

I understand that the reservations of the Trades Union Congress—although I do not, and could not, claim to speak for them—probably run something like this: "the more work experience schemes are extended, the less likely employers may be to do what they ought to do-that is, to provide induction courses for new employees". I think that the T.U.C. may well doubt that the aim of the measure is educational in a general sense. They obviously will need convincing on that. They may well regard the whole idea as one related to the least academically able youngsters who, in fact, need more general education, more schooling, Having seen some reports of the work experience scheme, I can appreciate why such reservations may exist. One such report includes the following: Most of the work experience schemes have been seen by the company as a potential recruiting medium. When no suitable recruits have emerged the company has dropped the scheme.

As I see a properly orientated work experience scheme, it provides experience of the very different world into which young persons enter when they leave school. The first concern of the school is the enrichment of the scholars. They are on the receiving end of everything that the school undertakes. They are the very reason for the existence of the school. Everything in the curriculum, the whole organisation, is designed and works to meet their needs and to develop their interests, their talents, their personalities. The world of remunerative work is a very different kind of place. Instead of being on the receiving end all the time they become a part of the means whereby the finished product is delivered, or the end of the enterprise achieved.

If schools and local education authorities seize and use imaginatively the opportunities that this Bill will present, then it will indeed help young people to gain experience of the world beyond school, without the penalties of premature commitment to a career or form of employment. It will give them an insight into the working lives of others and provide them with some knowledge of the whole environment of work, including the role of management and manager-worker relations. These young people ought, indeed need, to know something of the part played by the trade union movement, including the responsibilities of people such as shop stewards.

I have been greatly impressed by the approach, among others, of the National Union of Teachers in this matter, and I should like to quote briefly from a policy statement issued by them entitled Work Experience and Secondary Schools. They say: Well planned work experience should enable aspects of the school curriculum to become more meaningful and significant to the young person. Work experience is far more than a programme for school leavers. It is, rather, the education of the young adult in the differences between one collective institution—the school—with all the human and material supportive agencies that exist for the benefit of the pupils, and another—the factory or firm—which has its own set of supportive agencies, but where personal development of the people involved (i.e. the workers) may be only a minor objective of the organisation. Such experience should give a young adult a new sense of consciousness about his abilities and the interests and knowledge he has acquired in school and the possible application of these talents, interests and knowledge in the outside world.

I think too often the term "work experience" is regarded as being of value for the non-academic child and the early school leaver; and here again I think the N.U.T. put the point better than I could do. They say: The Union cannot accept, however, that work experience is only relevant to a certain type of pupil with a certain post-school objective. It is desirable that all pupils should have some form of work experience, even on a very limited basis and that such experience should be integrated into the fifth year curriculum of the school. I concur fully with that view. The academic stands to gain immeasurably, and indeed, I would say has a very great need to share in this experience.

When I was in Chicago some 18 months ago I had the privilege of visiting many schools in that large city. One of them was the Metro High School which was known as a "school without walls". Its base was in an office block. The students, as I recollect, spent somewhere between 75 per cent. and 90 per cent. of their time studying in museums, offices, hospitals, factories—the whole range. I thought that there was great advantage in taking education out into the work places and the market places so that students would see the value of their courses against the background of the real world. It may be the Metro carried the idea a little far, but I thought then that they were doing something which could and ought to be studied with ensuing considerable value. Of this I am certain: if we are to be successful we need the good will not only of the L.E.A.S and teachers, parents and employers, school governors and inspectors; we need the trade unions, the shop stewards, the branch secretaries and organisers who are engaged within the establishments to be involved, for let us make no mistake about the fact that, ultimately, we need the good will of the man on the shop floor. His good will is vital. I believe a code of practice would be of enormous help.

I hope the Government will appreciate that the Amendment is moved with a view to being helpful and to meet what seems to me a very great need. Although we have been told that lines of guidance may be given, I think it would be infinitely preferable that we should have contained within the Bill something along the lines of my Amendment which will make the intentions of the Government, the educational intentions of this Bill, obvious to all. I beg to move.

VISCOUNT AMORY

I think I agree with everything the noble Lord, Lord Garnsworthy, said about what the attitude to this work experience should be; in fact, knowing his general attitude, I am sure I do. Clearly it is not a vocational scheme in the narrow sense. The aim is not to get students to look at a particular job with a view to recruitment of them to that particular job, or anything like that. It is, as either Lord Garnsworthy himself said or one of the quotations that he gave us said—he did not tell us when the inverted commas stopped, so I was not absolutely clear where the quotation stopped and where the real Garnsworthy started.

LORD GARNSWORTHY

Where the phraseology began to deteriorate, that is when I took over!

VISCOUNT AMORY

But it is, as I think Lord Garnsworthy said, giving the students an experience of what life in the working world is like in general terms as a background to their general education. It is very important, as I think the noble Lord has said, that employers who take these students into their works should be absolutely clear what is and what is not involved. So in principle I agree that this should be crystal clear to everybody concerned.

The only other thing I would like to say is that, while clearly "vocational" in the narrower sense is inappropriate here, I believe one should not be too frightened of that word "vocational" or of introducing it into the educational field. Some educationalists seem to be so frightened of it to-day that sometimes I think they build up, unnecessarily, bulkheads, as it were, between general education and vocational education. I believe the two are coming together gradually, and if allowed to do so can do so very greatly to the general advantage. So I hope that in welcoming this Bill we shall not say anything which would seem to be denigratory to an element of the vocational, in the wide sense, being introduced into the general education experience of students.

7.27 p.m.

LORD BELSTEAD

The noble Baroness, Lady Phillips, gave notice on Second Reading of the possibility that an Amendment of this sort might be tabled, and I should like to say at the outset that the Government have every sympathy with the objects of this Amendment. May I make myself clear straightaway. Having listened carefully to both speeches, and also having re-read what was said by other noble Lords, some of whom, like Lord Beaumont, are in the Chamber this evening, we still are reluctant to see the objects of the Amendment enshrined in a formal code, contained in a Statutory Instrument, and variable only by a further Order.

Perhaps I may try to explain to the Committee why I am taking that view. The noble Lord, Lord Garnsworthy, has been so good as to repeat some of the statements about the intention of work experience which I made at Second Reading. May I just say a very brief word about the statutory background. What the Bill is concerned with of course is the provision of certain schemes as part of education. This was stressed by the noble Lord. The responsibility, however, for education and the curriculum in schools is with the local education authorities, under Section 23 of the Education Act, 1944, except in I voluntary aided schools where it is under; the control of the governors of individual schools. Both of these provisions, the provision putting the curriculum with the local education authorities or with the voluntary school governors, are subject to one qualification, namely, that the articles of government for a school may, provide otherwise. The most usual pattern found in articles is for the local education authority to be responsible for the place of the school within the provision for the area; for the governors to have a sort of general direction of the curriculum; and for the head teacher to have responsibility for the day-to-day running of the school. In any case, the point I am seeking to put is that responsibility lies at the local level and the Secretary of State would not normally intervene in such matters. I ask your Lordships to forgive me for embarking upon that explanation of the statutory background.

However, the Secretary of State does give guidance to local education authorities and schools by means of circulars and administrative memoranda, and this is where I come to the Amendment. Such documents draw attention to the implications of changes in the law or developments in policy, and may set out the Department's administrative requirements where these are involved, or give advice on the steps which the Secretary of State would expect the local education authorities and the schools themselves to take. So it was that in 1967 the Department gave guidance in very general terms about insurance for pupils and students visiting industry (Administrative Memorandum No. 22/67). In 1969, local education authorities were reminded of the law relating to work experience schemes as it then stood (Administrative Memorandum No. 12/69). We have always accepted—and I made this clear on Second Reading —that new guidance would be needed if the provisions contained in this Bill were enacted, and, as the noble Lord, Lord Garnsworthy, said, the right information getting through to the people involved is very important indeed. In consulting the educational and other interests in 1971, we stated that guidance on the criteria for schemes would have to be worked out in consultation with the educational interests, and we set out some of the considerations which we thought would have to be taken into account when the moment came. I must say that several of the replies made very useful suggestions for additions to these.

It is the intention to issue a circular if the Bill is passed, giving the sort of guidance which seems to be envisaged in this Amendment. Because the Amendment is asking for a code to be contained in a Statutory Instrument, may I suggest very quickly under headings the sort of points which I think the guidance we might give should touch upon. Guidance would certainly have to emphasise the educational nature of the work experience schemes, which was the first point in the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Garnsworthy. I think the guidance should refer to the fact that there must be the fullest possible consultation from the earliest stages of the formulation of any work experience schemes—and this I sought to refer to on Second Reading. It should also be made clear that there will be absolutely no payment by employers in respect of work which pupils may carry out, because this is not primarily vocational work. I should like to emphasise that point. Although I have listened very carefully to what my noble friend Lord Amory said, I am bound to make the point that one of the things which the teaching profession will find valuable if this Bill passes into law is that both the highly academic pupil and the pupil who is beginning to find books palling somewhat towards the end of his five-year secondary course will be able to indulge in work experience and will therefore have a fuller secondary course.

The noble Lord, Lord Garnsworthy, made an important point when he said that he thought the Trades Union Congress might have a reservation to this extent, that extension of work experience might mean reduction of induction courses. Because work experience is not supposed to be primarily vocational, I very much hope that that would not be so; that as it is not supposed to be a recruiting campaign this will not affect induction courses which should be laid on by employers. I think that guidance ought also to be given on such matters as travelling expenses in work experience and on providing mid-days meals. Certainly, guidance should reiterate what was said on Second Reading, that the parents of the pupils concerned should be kept informed at every step. It is most important that it should be made clear that any pupils who might find work experience unsuitable on physical or mental grounds should be looked at very carefully indeed.

The last point which springs to my mind is insurance. This is not a problem which is peculiar to work experience schemes; it can crop up in any arrangements which a school or authority makes for pupils to pay visits outside school premises. What is essential is that the school or the authority should satisfy themselves, before embarking upon a work experience scheme, that adequate cover is available for the course in one way or another. This is another point which I assure the Committee we should look at carefully in trying to formulate our advice. These are points of the sort which we have in mind. A draft of the circular is not yet ready because, obviously, we are waiting to see whether the Bill commends itself to both Houses of Parliament, but I should like to give this assurance: if this Bill passes into law, any guidance which we seek to give in a circular will most certainly go to all the educational interests for their comments, and to the C.B.I, and the T.U.C., because we have found the advice which was given in 1971 by all these organisations very valuable indeed. The tabling of this Amendment certaintly requires me to give this information to the Committee.

Finally, I am asking noble Lords opposite not to press this Amendment for two reasons. The first is that the responsibility for carrying this Bill into effect, according to both educational Statute and traditional usage, is a matter for the local education authorities and the schools. The second is that although the Government certainly accept that up-to-date guidance is desirable, and although we fully accept the spirit of subsection (4) of the proposed new clause in that consultation on the guidance should include local authorities, the teachers' organisations and both the C.B.I, and the T.U.C., we feel, at the same time, that it would be better if that guidance were given in nonstatutory form. I hope that the fairly full explanation which I have given to the Committee may have persuaded your Lordships likewise.

7.37 p.m.

BARONESS PHILLIPS

We should like to thank the Minister for his very long and detailed explanation, and if the Amendment has done nothing else it has enabled these facts to be placed on record in Hansard. But I wonder whether the noble Lord could elaborate a little more. Guidance sounds very good, but how far is it binding? I was thinking, in the matter of insurance, that it could result in a quite serious situation if guidance had been given but had not been acted upon by the headmaster or by the local authority, whoever was the responsible party. We all know only too well the way some schemes have been worked on an ad hoc basis where the not so academic child has been encouraged to see only factory work and has therefore gone into factory work. My noble friend and I are particularly keen that this should be work experience which all children in their last year can enjoy. I am concerned with a Voluntary Service Overseas scheme, and it is one of the sad facts that the child who has not passed examinations is generally excluded from such schemes. The Catholic scheme with which I am connected is the only one of which I know which takes any child of secondary school leaving age, and that seems to me to highlight the necessity for the sort of work experience to be written down in very clear form.

There are some people who would say that teachers ought to have work experience. One of the weaknesses of the teaching profession is that teachers go from school to college and then back to school, and they often have no work experience outside. This may be the only opportunity for some children to see the working life of the community in a different form, and they may well go straight into some other work. I would emphasise to the Minister that this scheme will operate with success only if it is possible to carry along with it the good will of the Trades Union Congress. I appreciate only too well the fact that guidance is given, and I am glad to know the lines of the guidance which we shall have. But I should have been happier if the guidance had been in the form of a Statutory Instrument. I am not quite sure what is the difficulty here, since there is no real difference if the guidance is expected to be followed up. But I shall leave the matter with my noble friend and let him have the last word on it.

LORD BELSTEAD

Would the noble Baroness like me to answer her question? The noble Baroness asked whether any guidance which is given would be binding. No, it would not be binding. But we had a long debate a few weeks ago on the National Health Service Bill, when certain noble Lords—and I have a feeling that the noble Lord, Lord Garnsworthy, and I were at one on this point—felt that central Government should not be allowed to lay down on a certain area of the curriculum something which would be binding. In the same way here, the guidance which is given cannot be, by the nature of our educational system in this country, i absolutely binding. It will be given, none the less, and of course it will place people who are involved in work experience in exactly the same insurance position as schools which are taking out parties for any other kind of visit. But as I have given an assurance to the Committee that this will be looked at carefully in formulating our guidance, may I repeat that.

While I am on my feet, may I also say that I share with my noble friend Lord Amory complete agreement with what the noble Baroness said about hoping that this may be of help, not only to pupils but also to those who teach; and I am sure that the teaching profession would agree with this. At the moment, members of Her Majesty's Inspectorate are looking into careers guidance in this country. There are many very devoted teachers giving up a lot of extra time in their school days and weeks in giving careers guidance to pupils, and if an increase in work experience now can assist them to get better links with industry and commerce, I am sure the first people who will welcome this will be the teaching profession themselves.

BARONESS PHILLIPS

Before my noble friend replies, may I say that as an ex-teacher and one in close contact with schools I should not like to go down on the Record as somebody who is not in total sympathy with the teachers. At this moment, underpaid and overworked as they are, I should certainly not like to be one who was thought in any way not to pay tribute to their devotion. In fact, we ask far too much of them by way of extra-mural activity. I would suggest to the noble Lord that perhaps the Department could arrange for sabbatical years so that the teachers could in fact renew themselves.

7.44 p.m.

LORD GARNSWORTHY

I think we are all grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, for the statement he has made. He has taken his usual care in replying to the points which have been made, and we shall study with the greatest interest what he has had to say. May I say that I hope that within the Department they will look perhaps a little closer at this matter than they may have done up to the present time. I do not think we are on to something which is going to be easy; I think we are going to be on to something which is very difficult indeed. We have some local authorities—I think Bristol is among them—who have done some outstandingly good work. I have a very strong feeling that there will be some areas where the closest possible watch will need to be kept to ensure that the noble aims as outlined by the noble Lord, Lord Belstead, are in point of fact observed.

Let us be under no illusion. The noble Lord referred to the responsibility of L.E.A.s and governors. I should be a great deal happier if boards of governors and boards of managers of our schools were more representative of our community than they are. Too often we have boards of governors, not one of the members of which has been at a State school or sends his child or children to a State school; and some of their ideas as to what is proper for other people's children do not always commend themselves to those who want to see the State service of education at the level that we know it ought to be and could be if in point of fact everybody responsible accepted that it ought to be good enough for everybody's child. It is because we have so many people speaking about the State service of education who have not been to our State schools, and have no intention of sending their children to State schools, that I am myself very concerned.

I am fortunate in that my parents had no alternative but to send me to a State school. That I went on from a State school was perhaps helpful to me. I think it was the noble Baroness who spoke on Second Reading of the clever ones who left school earlier. My elder brother passed what was then known as the labour exam, and he left at 12. I did not have to. I was fortunate; I was allowed to sit for what was then the scholarship examination, and I was allowed to sit for it at the age of 11. I always felt that my brother was the one who in fact could have taken greater advantage of the opportunities that came my way. Nevertheless I am indeed grateful to him for the sacrifice that he had to make, because he became a wage-earner at the age of 12 and it was the income that he brought into the home, added to my father's earnings, that made it possible for me to have a further educational opportunity. But it was thought right and proper that the bright ones should sit for an examination and should go out to work.

I want to express gratitude to the noble Viscount, Lord Amory, for what he had to say, but I want to add this. I am always glad to find myself in agreement with him, because his support at any time is extremely useful; we have many common aims and I think both of us have a deep love of local government and are anxious to serve its best interests. But he indicated that we ought not to be afraid of vocational training. I am sorry that the noble Lord, Lord Beaumont, is not here. Indeed, the Liberal Benches are empty, as they so often are, and the noble Lord is absent. But I thought he expressed a mild "Hear, hear!" (I hope I do him no injustice) when the noble Viscount was speaking. If he had been here, of course, he could have corrected me if I was in error. But I think we have to be very careful. Up to the compulsory school-leaving age, have we any reason to think that any child can really spare the time for vocational training? I should have thought that the need for general education was so very great—perhaps if the noble Viscount wishes to speak he will allow me to finish; I do not want to lose the trend of what I am saying—that we should introduce no element of vocational training, at least up until the age of compulsory school attendance.

I make that point because the challenges that face our young people in the future are going to be so much greater than they are at the present time, and they are already much greater than they were when we were small. Industry is going to change so much—the materials it uses, the techniques—and we are going to be confronted with inventions that nobody has thought of at the present time. These young people are going to need to be very adaptable indeed. Although I realise that some of them tend to get a little bored with books at the present time, the fault is not theirs; the fault is with an educational system that has not prepared them for the opportunities of secondary education.

VISCOUNT AMORY

I do not really think there is anything between the noble Lord and myself on this. It all turns on the meaning of "vocation". If it means a specific instruction in a specific vocational subject, then I would agree entirely with the noble Lord. The only point I am making is this. I have known teachers shy away so much from vocational training that the general education, in my opinion, sometimes tends to become to academic. All I am asking is that at certain points the two might be integrated a little for the benefit of both. What I am saying is that what I want to do is to make sure that the general education is the very best that can be given and fully justifies the term "a sound general education".

LORD GARNSWORTHY

I am grateful to the noble Viscount. I do not apologise for provoking him to intervene because he has come a little further along the road with me. I understand his position.

I would say this. We have for some long time been moving away from over-early commitment to technical colleges and colleges of art. I remember, for I was a member of a managing committee of a school for handicapped children, when we taught them how to mend boots and shoes. I am anxious that the movement forward, the refusal to engage in vocational training, the determination that we will not get youngsters committed too early and inappropriately—and this is a trend that many of us welcome—is not threatened in any way. My noble friend Lady Phillips—and I was going to say this at the beginning—left me with nothing to say; but I find that I have taken quite a few minutes in making my one or two points. In view of what has been said I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

House resumed.

Bill reported without Amendment; Report received.

[The Sitting was suspended at 7.53 p.m. and resumed at 8.0 p.m.]