COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 13 November 1989)

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 430. In rising to move that the House do agree with the Commons in that amendment I am conscious of the fact that the noble Lord, Lord Williams, and his colleagues do not have any further amendments to Commons amendments. Will the noble Lord agree, therefore, that we can take a large number of the amendments en bloc? I am happy to go through them one by one or agree groupings if the noble Lord prefers; but if he does not have any further questions the time of the House may be saved if I can move them further en bloc. Perhaps the noble Lord will indicate his wishes.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord. We have some comments on the amendment the noble Lord has moved and some further comments on Amendment No. 431. We may have further comments as we go along. Until we hear the noble Lord's explanation on these amendments we do not know whether we shall have any serious comments. In general, we are anxious to get on with the business quickly, but we prefer to stick to the groupings as they are.

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I apologise to the noble Lord in the Chair for the somewhat unusual procedure. I shall continue with Amendment No. 430. This amendment extends the meaning of university entrance level. The effect is that a recognised qualifying body may regard persons as having attained that level —and thus able to embark on the qualification —if the body or some other body approved by the Secretary of State has assessed them on the basis of written tests approved by the Secretary of State as being of a standard of ability which would entitle them to be considered for admission to a university or other similar establishment. This will extend the number of persons who can be considered for entry to a course leading to the qualification while maintaining the requirement in the directive that unless the prospective auditor has had certain periods of relevant professional experience he must attain university entrance level.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I wish to confine myself solely to the topic raised by the noble Lord, which is the concept of attaining university entrance level, and to make the observation that this is a Bill 1153 promoted by the Department of Trade and Industry. It is rather strange to find that the concept of attaining university entrance level is defined within a Bill proposed by the Department of Trade and Industry with no reference to the Department of Education and Science.
I thought that attaining university entrance level was a well defined concept in this country. It consists, of certain rules concerning A-levels or other matters relating to what universities themselves regard as acceptable for entry. I am not opposing an interest on the part of the Department of Trade and Industry on what is to be regarded as attaining university entry level, but I am slightly taken aback by sub-paragraph (b) because the only references within these written tests, with or without oral examination, are still to the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.
I must ask the noble Lord whether the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has consulted his right honourable colleague the Secretary of State for Education and Science on intervening or interfering in areas which many of us would have thought were none of his business. I am not saying that that is a bad thing. It is always a pleasure when the Department of Trade and Industry takes an interest in the subject of education, but I have to put on record the fact that it is slightly odd.

§ Lord Trefgarne
My Lords, I can confirm that the Government are a broad catholic church and have taken all the necessary views into account. The problem is one of mature students who are sometimes admitted to universities without development A-levels but on the basis of a test conducted by the university at the time.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, that is my point. As a university person myself I am well aware of the existence of mature students. At the very least I hope that the Department of Trade and Industry will therefore consult universities which have had a lot of experience in dealing with mature students. My reason for intervening was precisely to draw that to the attention of the Minister. I am well aware of the reason for the amendment, but I also hope he is aware that there is a vast experience within the university and polytechnic worlds of dealing with these matters.