§ Mr. Andrew TurnerTo ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what estimate she has made of the percentage of graduates who will receive lifetime earnings of(a) less then 75 per cent., (b) 75 to 90 per cent., (c) 90 to 110 per cent., (d) 110 to 125 per cent., (e) 125 to 175 per cent. and (f) more than 175 per cent. of the average of those not participating in higher education. [32733]
§ Margaret Hodge[holding answer 1 February 2002]: We estimate lifetime earnings profiles for individuals "who have participated in an undergraduate higher education course" (whether they graduated or not) using statistical simulation models and current employment and earnings data. The table shows the estimated distribution of undergraduate participant lifetime earnings, relative to the average of those "who do not hold a higher education qualification". Lifetime earnings are based on earnings between the ages of 18 and 59 years.
Data limitations mean that the figures in the table provide only a broad estimate of the distribution of lifetime earnings, and weight cannot be placed on the precise percentages in each band. The two comparison groups are not mutually exclusive, and both potentially include individuals who may have participated in higher education but did not subsequently obtain a qualification.
Estimated percentage of UG HE participant lifetime earnings above and below the average for those who do not hold an HE qualification Distribution Percentage Less than 75 per cent, of the non-HE average 6 75 per cent, to less than 90 per cent. 5 90 per cent, to less than 110 per cent. 9 110 per cent, to less than 125 per cent. 7 125 per cent, to less than 175 per cent. 20 175 per cent, or more than the non-HE average 53 Total 100 Notes:
1. The Department has previously used two statements to support HE, and in particular its AimHigher campaign: that on average, graduates earn around 35 per cent. more than the national average; and, on average, earn around £400,000 more over their working lives than the national average.
2. The figures presented in the table do not invalidate these statements. They are based on different comparison groups and cannot be compared.
Sources:
Labour Force Survey, British Household Panel Survey, Student Income and Expenditure Survey 1998, Student Loan Company.
1132W
§ Mr. CousinsTo ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what has been the student loan(a) repayment threshold and (b) interest rate in each year since 1996; and what each will be in academic year 2002–03. [40557]
§ Margaret HodgeThe information requested is shown in the table.
Academic years Interest rate1 (Percentage) Mortgage style2 loans deferment threshold (£) Income contingent loans repayment threshold (£) 1996–97 2.7 15,792 n/a 1997–98 2.6 16,488 n/a 1998–99 3.5 17,784 n/a 1999–2000 2.1 18,192 n/a 2000–01 2.6 19,104 10,000 2001–02 2.3 19,728 10,000 2001–03 3— 3— 10,000 1 Interest is linked to inflation, so that the amount repaid will be worth, in real terms, what was borrowed. 2 Mortgage style loans are not income contingent. They are paid back in a fixed number of monthly instalments. Most borrowers pay back 60 instalments over five years. If five or more loans are taken out they pay 84 instalments over seven years. 3 To be set. The interest rate and deferment threshold for mortgage style loans for the academic year 2002–03 are calculated at a later stage. The interest rate will be the retail prices index increase for the year to March 2002. The deferment threshold will be 85 per cent. of national average earnings for April 2002.