§ 2.53 p.m.
§ Lord RochesterMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are satisfied with the performance of the non-statutory training organisations set up after the dismantling of the majority of industrial training boards under the Employment and Training Act 1981.
§ The Secretary of State for Employment (Lord Young of Graffham)My Lords, the Government are satisfied with the general progress of the non-statutory arrangements which replaced the industry training boards. Most non-statutory training organisations are living up to the promises made to Ministers when boards were abolished and the Government expect these organisations to grow further in strength.
A progress report on the development of these arrangements was discussed by the Manpower Services Commission last week. A copy of that paper has been placed in the Library.
§ Lord RochesterMy Lords, now that the chairman of the Manpower Services Commission has acknowledged that a considerable number of these voluntary training organisations are not up to scratch in various ways, will the noble Lord accept that we on these Benches welcome the guidelines which the Government and the Manpower Services Commission 830 are reportedly to issue, aimed at bringing the standards of the least effective organisations of this kind up to those of the best? Will he also assure us that if these guidelines fail in their purpose, the Government will reconsider whether some form of statutory framework should be set up aimed at ensuring that training to achieve clearly defined objectives is actually carried out?
§ Lord Young of GraffhamMy Lords, I think that I can do no more than to quote from part of the paper which is in your Lordships' Library. It says:
The non-statutory training organisations consider that training has improved significantly since the demise of the 16 industrial training boards".It goes on to say:The bureaucratic boards, it is argued, gave training itself a bad name and it is only now that this animosity is being dissipated. One reason for the bureaucracy was the range of subsections which the board were required to cover".I do not believe that anyone in your Lordships' House will yet be satisfied with the standard of training in this country. What we can say is that the non-statutory training organisations are improving that standard, and it will remain a priority of the Manpower Services Commission to continue that improvement.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, bearing in mind the considerable experience at regional level of the CBI, the TUC and the small businessmen's industrial associations, would it be possible for the Government to get those elements—the TUC, the CBI, and the small businessmen's associations—to co-operate at regional level in assisting the endeavours of the noble Lord the Minister himself?
§ Lord Young of GraffhamMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Molloy. However, since we have looked at training on a sectorial basis so that individual sectors of industry are responsible for their training we have seen a substantial improvement. I am not sure how much further we could go by looking at cross-sectors with the CBI and the TUC.
§ Lord Taylor of BlackburnMy Lords, is the Minister aware of the work of certain enterprise boards, such as in Lancashire, that have started training courses to assist Her Majesty's Government in the way in which the Minister has been instructing us this afternoon?
§ Lord Young of GraffhamMy Lords, it may come as no small surprise to anyone in your Lordships' House that I have just recently heard from my noble friend Lord Elton about the great success of the Lancashire board, and I pay tribute to it.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, is it a fact that the construction industry's record over the years has been superb in the matter of industrial training? Will the Minister assure us that, whatever may happen as regards the present and the future, its performance will not be interfered with or damaged in any way?
§ Lord Young of GraffhamMy Lords, it is very difficult to give an assurance for all time. All I can say is that the construction industry training board has performed extremely well in helping with both the one-year youth training scheme and the two-year 831 YTS, and it is a great credit to the industry. We shall do all in our power to encourage it to continue on those lines.
§ Lord JacquesMy Lords, does the Minister agree that what we need in particular is more and more training of a high standard, in which there is the discipline of an examination which is recognised by employers, for which they pay a premium?
§ Lord Young of GraffhamYes, my Lords; I am very glad that the noble Lord has made that point. The review of vocational qualifications which led to the establishment of a national vocational qualification, which will come into being within the next two years, will be a significant step forward in the recognition of vocational qualifications. I hope that employers will recognise that in the most appropriate manner possible.
§ Lord LeatherlandMy Lords, if I wished to avail myself of industrial training, how should I go about it? I am sure that many people do not know how to do so.
§ Lord Young of GraffhamMy Lords, if the noble Lord cares to write to me, I shall ensure that he goes on the appropriate course.