§ Mr. Barry Sheermanasked the Secretary of State for Employment (1) what information he has on the number of staff employed by Trans Promotions Ltd. in running its youth training schemes in each relevant Manpower Services Commission area; how this information compares with the average figures given in the report to the Manpower Services Commission youth training board of the Manpower Services Commission's survey of scheme providers, paper YTB 85/14, annex A, paragraph 1.1; and if he will make a statement;
300W(2) whether the Manpower Services Commission undertook any financial checks into the standing of the youth training scheme managing agent Trans Promotions Ltd. prior to the signing of a contract between Trans Promotions Ltd. and the Manpower Services Commission; and whether there are any plans to conduct such a check in the future;
(3) what steps he has taken to satisfy himself that the youth training schemes run by Trans Promotions Ltd. meet the minimum criteria of the Manpower Services Commission; and if he will make a statement;
(4) on what dates the large companies unit, the large companies sub-group of the youth training board and the youth training board of the Manpower Services Commission approved a contract to provide youth training scheme places between the Manpower Services Commission and the managing agent Trans Promotions Ltd.; on what dates the renewal of the contract for 1984–85 was approved; on what dates a list of work experience provider for 1984–85 was approved; and what steps he has taken to satisfy himself as to the actions of the above bodies and as to the adequacy and accuracy of the list of work experience providers;
(5) how many places on the youth training scheme are being offered by the managing agent Trans Promotions Ltd. nationally and by Manpower Services Commission area in the current year; how many trainees were in training in these places nationally and by Manpower Services Commission area on the latest available date; and how many trainees have entered such places by Manpower Services Commission area and nationally in the current year.
§ Mr. Peter Morrison[pursuant to his reply, 17 May 1985, c. 241]:The first agreement between Trans Promotions Ltd. and the large companies unit of the Manpower Services Commission was exchanged on 9 May 1983. Scheme approval was given by officials of the large companies unit using authority delegated by the youth training board large companies unit sub-group. A renewal agreement for 1984–85 was exchanged on 29 June 1984 under the same procedure.
Prior to the signing of agreements, the bulk of individual work experience placements were approved by officials of the large companies unit following consultation with officials of Manpower Services Commission training division area offices. As in all schemes, adjustments were made subseuently in the light of operational experience.
Action by officials and agreements were endorsed by the youth training board large companies unit sub-group on 15 June 1983 in respect of 1983–84 and on 31 July 1984 in respect of 1984–85.
The youth training board large companies unit sub group reports directly to the youth training board who are in turn responsible to the Commission.
Contracts for 1985–86 have not yet been signed. The 1984–85 agreement covered 323 places nationally. A total of 100 trainees were in training on 25 March 1985; 220 trainees had entered the 1984–85 scheme by that date. It 301W is not possible to provide an analysis of these figures by Manpower Services Commission training division area offices other than at disproportionate cost.
The large companies unit applies national standards with regard to quality and financial status to the schemes that it negotiates. Routine checks were made to establish the company status of Trans Promotions Ltd. but a detailed investigation into its financial affairs was not made. Such an investigation would only be undertaken in the event of serious concern or doubt and there are no plans to make such an investigation in this case.
All youth training schemes are regularly monitored by Manpower Services Commission officials to establish whether they meet current requirements for content and design laid down by the Commission. The large companies unit's current assessment of the Trans Promotion Ltd. scheme is that it is meeting current requirements.
The report, presented to the Manpower Services Commission youth training board on 14 March 1985, showed that on average, the equivalent of eight full-time staff were employed by managing agents to manage, administer and provide training for each 100 trainees. However, the number of staff employed by individual managing agents varied depending on the extent to which elements of the programme were sub-contracted or offered in-house. Trans Promotions Ltd. has provided details of staffing in confidence and the large companies unit is satisfied that they are adequate.