Proceeding contribution from Baroness Sharp of Guildford (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 October 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill.
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply, but, if I may say so, in both cases he misses the point. The key issue expressed in the first four amendments is not that there is any objection to the fact that there may be an intervention process—we recognise that there must be a fallback position and are not objecting to Clause 65 as such. What the amendments are saying is that an elected authority with the power of the electorate behind it is the appropriate one. There are many procedures for consultation with the Secretary of State—you must issue an intervention statement and so forth—so it is right that the Secretary of State, who has the legitimacy of being elected, issues a directive to an elected authority. The YPLA is just an appointed authority—this is the point. The Minister’s answer does not address that. It is a minor thing. The YPLA has to go to the Secretary of State and justify issuing a directive. The Secretary of State has to say, "Okay, you can issue a directive", so we might as well have the Secretary of State issuing the directive. It is a matter of constitutional legitimacy, not a question of whether or not there should be intervention. In relation to the colleges, again it seems that they seek to cut through the bureaucracy. There may be occasions when local authorities miscalculate the figures, do not commission enough provision; or when there is genuine disagreement about funding. Colleges will then have to go through the normal local government complaints procedures if they wish to appeal against decisions. As we know, such procedures can be lengthy and bureaucratic, and it is important that funding is in place for September. The Minister says that the Government are committed to the budget being set by 31 March. The LSC is also committed to that, but the budget is often not in place by 31 July. How can you guarantee, when you have this complicated procedure, that your budget can get set? This is a mild amendment. Having read Martin Doel’s letter I am surprised at how mild it is. All it asks is to enable colleges to talk directly to the YPLA to sort out an issue. I shall go away and contemplate the Minister’s totally inadequate answers.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 713 c270
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Accountability Administration Apprentices Adult education Finance Fees and charges Education Further education Learning disability Learning and Skills Council for England Local government Qualifications Prisoners Non-departmental public bodies Standards Training Young people Young offenders Vocational education Sixth form education Literacy Academies Numeracy Individual learning accounts Young People's Learning Agency Skills Funding Agency Ofsted
- Legislation
- Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:11:06 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_584446
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_584446
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_584446