HC Deb 28 November 1988 vol 142 cc77-8W
Mr. Andrew F. Bennett

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science (1) if he will set out how much a single student living in private rented accommodation outside London would gain or lose as a consequence of his proposals in the White Paper, "Top-up loans for Students", Cm. 520, to abolish student entitlements to welfare benefits and introduce top up loans, assuming rents of(a) £20 per week, (b) £25 per week, (c) £30 per week and (d) £35 per week, taking the assumptions of grant levels as set out in the White Paper, paragraph 3.8.

(2) if he will set out how much a single student living in private rented accommodation in London would gain or lose as a consequence of his proposals in the White Paper, "Top-up loans for Students", Cm. 520, to abolish student entitlements to welfare benefits and introduce top up loans, assuming rents of (a) £35 per week, (b) £40 per week, (c) £45 per week and (d) £50 per week, taking the assumptions of grant levels as set out in the White Paper paragraph 3.8.

Mr. Jackson

I shall write to the hon. Member as soon as possible, and place a copy of my letter in the Library.

Mr. Andrew F. Bennett

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science, how many students will be(a) better off and (b) worse off as a result of his proposals to introduce top-up student loans in 1990–91 and to freeze parental contributions and the level of student grants at their 1990–91 level, as well as abolishing entitlements to welfare benefits.

Mr. Jackson

The White Paper, "Top-up Loans for Students", includes illustrative figures for the value of the top-up loans in 1990–91. On that basis, the great majority of students affected by the top-up loan facility would be better off. The small numbers whose benefit claims would have exceeded the top-up loan facility will be able to seek further resources from the access funds.

Mr. Andrew F. Bennett

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science if he will estimate the total amounts to be spent on student grants in the year 2007–8 assuming the freezing of the parental contribution scales and the level of grants at their 1990–91 levels as set out in paragraph 3.8 of the White Paper Cm. 520 and increases in average earnings of(a) 7.5 per cent. per annum, (b) 5 per cent. per annum and (c) 3 per cent. per annum.

Mr. Jackson

Expenditure on student grants in the year 2007–8 will depend on the rate of inflation between now and then. On the White Paper's assumption of a constant 3 per cent. rate of inflation after 1990–91, expenditure in 2007–8 on mandatory awards for maintenance for students in England and Wales will be £350 million in 1990–91 prices compared to forecast expenditure of £588 million in 1990–91. Expenditure on discretionary awards, and on the proposed access funds, will be additional. Since the grant and the parental contribution will remain in fixed proportion, the figures do not vary with the assumption about average earnings. The parental contribution scale will be reindexed annually so that after 1990 parents whose income rises at the same rate as the earnings trend will pay the same contribution from year to year in cash terms.

Mr. Andrew F. Bennett

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Science how the figures of £420 per year and £310 in the final year of study as top up loan facilities for students set out in the White Paper Cm. 520, paragraph 3.8, were calculated; and what assumptions were made in arriving at those figures.

Mr. Jackson

The maximum top-up loan facilities proposed in the White Paper have been set at levels which will provide students with additional resources and make it unnecessary for them to look for supplementary support from the social security system. The lower maxima for the final year have been calculated to cover 38 weeks—the average duration of term time and short vacations—instead of 52.