---

Education and Skills Bill

No. Both the Conservative party and the Liberal Democrats are now embarrassingly out of step with the views not only of educationalists but of business. The CBI said in its response to our Green Paper last summer that"““the government's proposal for raising the age for compulsory participation in education or training to 18 is a necessary step””." In addition, David Frost of the British Chambers of Commerce said:"““Combining new specialised Diplomas and an expansion in the number of apprenticeships with a rise in the compulsory participation age to 18 is a move that we welcome.””" The CBI and the British Chambers of Commerce both welcome compulsory education until the age of 18—indeed, they say that it is necessary—yet the hon. Members for Surrey Heath and for Yeovil have put themselves and their parties on the wrong side of that debate. The hon. Gentlemen are doing something more than that, however. Not only are they opposing reforms proposed in the House by this Government; they are opposing reforms proposed in the House by the great Tory and Liberal reformers of the past, such as Rab Butler and the former Liberal Member for Sheffield, Hallam—not the current one—Herbert Fisher. It might be interesting for hon. Members to learn that Herbert Fisher said of his 1918 Bill that it acclaimed the"““principle of the rights of youth””," in that it held that"““young people have a right to be educated””" not just to 14 but to 18, and that that right was not just for the minority but for all young people. He was a Liberal reformer proposing a Liberal reform that the hon. Member for Yeovil now opposes.