---

Further Education and Training Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 1: 1: Clause 1 , page 1, line 6, leave out ““for ““12”” substitute ““10”””” and insert ““for ““not less than 12 and not more than 16”” substitute ““not less than 14 and not more than 18”””” The noble Baroness said: We are very grateful to the Minister for all his correspondence and to the Bill team for all the time that they have spent with us explaining the Government’s intentions in the Bill. It has been very helpful. We are also very grateful for the time of the Minister in another place, Bill Rammell, who has spent quite a number of meetings discussing with us certain aspects of this very non-controversial Bill—I do not know what Hansard will make of that; it was meant to be ironic. Amendment No. 1 is intended to probe the Government about why it is necessary to reduce the number of council members. It is vital, following reorganisation, that the Learning and Skills Council remains open and accountable and gets away from any possible accusation of being totally centralised. That is why we think that a membership of 10 would be too small. Such a small number gives very little opportunity to ensure that the regions, learning providers, employers, unions and, most importantly, learners are all represented. We have suggested 14 to 18 as the possible number of council members, but we are open to persuasion about the actual number. Our amendment probes the Government about why they feel it necessary to legislate for a reduction not just from the previous number of members on the Learning and Skills Council but from the number of members on its predecessor, the Further Education Funding Council, which had no fewer than 12 and no more than 15 members. Can the noble Lord advise us? I beg to move.