Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Lucas (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 15 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 take this opportunity to come back to the question that we debated yesterday on the meaning of the wording in Clause 117(4), which duplicates that in Clauses 73, 74 and Clause 59(10). The question here is where that wording leaves the line to be drawn. I have had some very useful discussions with members of the team since last night, and my understanding is that their intention is to leave the line fuzzy and, as it were, to be determined in each case, but that it is clearly out of court for a Minister to try to direct how an individual institution should be funded. It would be clearly allowable that the Minister should direct, say, that additional funding was given to sixth-form colleges generally and that the interpretation of any particular instruction would have to come down to the particular circumstances, because clearly no exact rule is specified in the clause. The line, in terms of the wording, could come anywhere. It is important to establish on the Floor of the House what the Government’s intention is and how in practice the line should be drawn.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
713 c352 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Assessments Curriculum Apprentices Adult education Equality Finance Fees and charges Higher education Learning disability Offenders Qualifications Prisons National curriculum tests Political impartiality Statistics Standards Special educational needs Training Sports Vocational education Sixth form colleges Young People's Learning Agency Ofqual
Legislation
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk