HL Deb 28 February 1992 vol 536 cc491-3

11.20 a.m.

Lord Judd asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will initiate an immediate review of student poverty.

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, no. Following the introduction of student loans, students now have substantial additional resources. In the academic year 1991–92 the full-year grant and loan is more than 30 per cent. higher than the grant for 1989–90. In addition, access funds are available for those in particular financial need. We have no plans to conduct a review.

Lord Judd

My Lords, while thanking the noble Baroness for that reply, does she not agree that it is deeply disturbing that real hardship is being encountered, not least when the parental contribution is not forthcoming? Too many students are running into debt, living in squalor, suffering ill health and having to seek employment, if they can find it, beyond what is acceptable if they are to take their studies seriously. Apart from humanitarian concerns, does that not run counter to the whole purpose of expanding higher education? Are the Government going to finance expansion on the backs of students who are suffering hardship? What are they doing to provide adequate funds and resources for the expansion of higher education?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Judd, and I have close links with the London School of Economics. I understand his anxiety and closeness to the issue. First, the Government's policy is that higher education places should be available for all those qualified and motivated to take them. Secondly, the noble Lord quotes the possibility of hardship to students. Perhaps I may point out that last year loans were taken up by only 28 per cent. and the evidence obtained from monitoring indicates that this year less than 50 per cent. of students will take up loans.

We believe that education in the higher sector is a responsibility to be shared among the taxpayer, the student and the student's family. I also ask the noble Lord whether or not he recalls that most of us at university also worked during that period.

Lord Desai

My Lords, is the Minister aware that an unemployed youth will obtain more from income supplement and housing benefit than a student receives either inside or outside London? Are the Government happy that they are encouraging students to leave education and become unemployed? Is she also aware that the value of the grant is 25 per cent. less in real terms since 1978–79 than it is today?

Is the Minister happy that the level of debt among students is running at £1,400 in London and at £600 outside London?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, I am not sure whether it is right to respond to a considerable number of questions with a question. I ask the noble Lord, Lord Desai: is he also aware that the privilege of higher education is of benefit to a person for the whole of his or her lifetime and that it certainly gives that person an edge in obtaining employment? I also stress what I said in my original Answer. In looking at the support for students it is essential that the grants and loans are looked at together, which are 30 per cent. higher this year.

Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe

My Lords, as one of the handful of Members of your Lordships' House who is not associated with the London School of Economics, will the Minister consider that there should be encouragement for more students to live at home when they are taking their courses? Does the Minister agree that that would not only alleviate the problems referred to by my noble friend Lord Judd, but also release hundreds of thousands of rented units of accommodation which could be used for homeless and deprived families?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe, brings his strong streak of realism to this question. He raises an interesting point despite his disadvantage of not having an association with the London School of Economics. This is a matter for the students themselves. Some consider moving away from home as part of their growth; others welcome the comfort which staying at home brings. Sometimes the courses of study they follow mean that they have to stay away from home. It is a matter of personal choice. I repeat, the noble Lord makes a very good point.

Lord Jenkin of Roding

My Lords, is it not misleading the House and students for the noble Lord, Lord Judd, somehow to imply that if parents do not pay their contribution the party which he supports is somehow going to make it up? Has there ever been any suggestion that the party opposite will in fact abolish the parental contribution or what it will do if there are parents who are reluctant to pay? Does my noble friend agree that that is part of the mischief-making of this pre-election period?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, it is with great pleasure that I say that I am not responsible for the views of the party opposite. In replying to my noble friend, I point out that in giving evidence to the Select Committee neither the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux nor the NUS could produce solid evidence of real hardship or of students abandoning their courses.

Lord Judd

My Lords, in thanking the Minister for the care which she has taken in replying to the questions, I ask her again: does it really make sense to expand higher education in the context of considerable anxiety and insecurity among the student population? Is that a sound investment in the future of the nation? As regards parental contributions, will the Minister give some indication of the Government's willingness to look at how we can ensure that parental contributions are paid? Does she not agree that that is the issue because too many parents are not paying them?

Baroness Denton of Wakefield

My Lords, the concern that I express in my answers is because the future of this country depends on the growth and experience of young people. There is no solid, reliable evidence to show that students are under the great pressures that he talks about. Local education authorities' awards officers say that student drop-out rates are no higher now than in previous years. The Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals and the heads of the polytechnics appear to be coming to the same conclusion.