HL Deb 27 February 1990 vol 516 cc591-2

Earl Russell asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether, in assessing parental contribution for student grants, they will take account of mortgage debts beyond the first £30,000.

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, the Government have no present plans to do so.

Earl Russell

My Lords, is the Minister aware that according to government figures, 35 per cent, of parents fail to pay the full parental contribution? Is she also aware that according to government figures given in a parliamentary answer last week the average new mortgage in London is now £60,000? Does the Minister entertain the hypothesis that those two figures might in some way be connected?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, the Government are aware that there is a burden on parents that needs to be addressed. It is probably right to say at this time that much of the debate for the next few hours will address that concern.

Lord Grimond

My Lords, is it not true that much of the debate over the next few hours will also focus on the complaints of students that they are poor? Part of the reason is the failure of parents to pay their parental contributions. If this proposal of my noble friend would help in extracting the parental contribution from reluctant parents would it not be worth considering?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, any change to the ceiling on mortgage tax relief helps only a very small number of people. Those above that threshold will not necessarily be affected by being brought into the grant and those below the ceiling will not be helped at all.

Lord Harmar-Nicholls

My Lords, would it not have been generous on the part of the noble Earl to withdraw this Question in view of the time that will be spent on the same subject matter as a result of his amendment later today?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, I think I addressed that point in my previous reply.

Lord Peston

My Lords, I was not aware that we intended to take a long time this afternoon on student matters. For those of us who are parents and who have been involved with parental contributions, is not one of the problems the incredibly complicated form that we have to fill in? I recall that when I filled in the form I could not understand a word of it or what the final assessment was. Will the Minister ask her right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science, if he ever has any spare time from his other responsibilities, to look again at the parental contribution form, at least with a view to simplifying it so that some of us parents can understand it?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, I always take the messages I receive to my right honourable friend. If it is an idea that can simplify matters, that is important, but simplification can often introduce even more rough justice. That also must be kept in balance. However, the system which is used at the moment to arrive at a fair assessment assesses gross income with a number of required deductions. I have no doubt that that matter will be addressed later today.

Earl Russell

My Lords, will the Government entertain the idea that in handling young people they regularly assume a contribution from parents which they nevertheless do not require parents to pay and that the effects of this in many cases may be unfortunate? Do the Government consider that the whole subject may need reconsideration?

Baroness Blatch

My Lords, I agree with the noble Earl that there is concern as regards those parents who have an obligation to pay their contribution but who do not meet the obligation. It is for that reason that the top-up loans scheme is being considered. Again we shall have ample opportunity later today to discuss that aspect of the top-up loans scheme.

Back to