Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Thursday Volume 499 12 November 2009 No. 141 Part1of2 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Thursday 12 November 2009 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2009 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; e-mail: [email protected] 339 12 NOVEMBER 2009 340 they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament according to the House of Commons provisions of Private Business Standing Order 188A (Suspension of bills).—(The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.) Thursday 12 November 2009 Hon. Members: Object. To be considered tomorrow. The House met at half-past Ten o’clock MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL BILL [LORDS] (BY ORDER) PRAYERS Motion made, That the promoters of the Manchester City Council Bill which was originally introduced in the House of Lords in the Session [MR.SPEAKER in the Chair] 2006-07 on 22 January 2007, should have leave to suspend any further proceedings on the Bill in order to proceed with it, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament according to the provisions of Private Business Standing Order 188A (Suspension BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS of bills).—(The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.) Hon. Members: Object. CANTERBURY CITY COUNCIL BILL (BY ORDER) To be considered tomorrow. Third Reading opposed and deferred until tomorrow (Standing Order. No. 20). CANTERBURY CITY COUNCIL BILL (BY ORDER) Motion made, NOTTINGHAM CITY COUNCIL BILL (BY ORDER) That the promoters of the Canterbury City Council Bill which Third Reading opposed and deferred until tomorrow was originally introduced in this House in the previous Session on (Standing Order. No. 20). 22 January 2008, should have leave to suspend any further proceedings on the Bill in order to proceed with it, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament according to the provisions of Private BOURNEMOUTH BOROUGH COUNCIL BILL [LORDS] Business Standing Order 188A (Suspension of bills).—(The Second (BY ORDER) Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.) Consideration of Bill, as amended, opposed and deferred until tomorrow (Standing Order No. 20). Hon. Members: Object. To be considered tomorrow. MANCHESTER CITY COUNCIL BILL [LORDS] LEEDS CITY COUNCIL BILL (BY ORDER) (BY ORDER) Consideration of Bill, as amended, opposed and deferred Ordered, until tomorrow (Standing Order No. 20). That the promoters of the Leeds City Council Bill which was originally introduced in this House in the previous Session on 22 January 2008, should have leave to suspend any further proceedings LEEDS CITY COUNCIL (BY ORDER) on the Bill in order to proceed with it, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament according to the provisions of Private Consideration of Bill, as amended, opposed and deferred Business Standing Order 188A (Suspension of bills).—(The Second until tomorrow (Standing Order No. 20). Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.) READING BOROUGH COUNCIL BILL (BY ORDER) NOTTINGHAM CITY COUNCIL BILL (BY ORDER) Consideration of Bill, as amended, opposed and deferred Motion made, until tomorrow (Standing Order No. 20). That the promoters of the Nottingham City Council Bill which was originally introduced in this House in the previous Session on 22 January 2008, should have leave to suspend any further proceedings CITY OF WESTMINSTER BILL [LORDS](BY ORDER) on the Bill in order to proceed with it, if they think fit, in the next Motion made, Session of Parliament according to the provisions of Private Business Standing Order 188A (Suspension of bills).—(The Second That so much of the Lords message [12 October] as relates to Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.) the City of Westminster Bill [Lords] be now considered.—(The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.) Hon. Members: Object. Hon. Members: Object. To be considered tomorrow. To be considered tomorrow. READING BOROUGH COUNCIL BILL (BY ORDER) Ordered, BOURNEMOUTH BOROUGH COUNCIL BILL [LORDS] (BY ORDER) That the promoters of the Reading Borough Council Bill which was originally introduced in this House in the previous Motion made, Session on 22 January 2008, should have leave to suspend any That the promoters of the Bournemouth Borough Council Bill further proceedings on the Bill in order to proceed with it, if they which was originally introduced in the House of Lords in the think fit, in the next Session of Parliament according to the Session 2006-07 on 22 January 2007, should have leave to suspend provisions of Private Business Standing Order 188A (Suspension any further proceedings on the Bill in order to proceed with it, if of bills).—(The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.) 341 Oral Answers12 NOVEMBER 2009 Oral Answers 342 because they could not cost it after the election. That is Oral Answers to Questions the Liberal Democrats’ position—conceit and taking our students for granted. BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS Rob Marris (Wolverhampton, South-West) (Lab): My understanding is that Cambridge and Oxford still refuse to let full-time students work during term time. The access regulator, as I understand it, has never imposed The Minister of State was asked— any sanctions against any university. Will my right hon. Friend look into this? Higher Education Mr. Lammy: I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for 1. Dr. Phyllis Starkey (Milton Keynes, South-West) bringing that point to my attention. He knows that (Lab): What steps his Department is taking to ensure universities are autonomous, but I had not heard that fair access to higher education for all. [299489] before. I will look into the matter and discuss it with the funding council. The Minister for Higher Education and Intellectual Property (Mr. David Lammy): Last week, we published our higher education framework. There has been a Mr. John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) narrowing in the gap between the least advantaged and (Con): In a written answer, the Minister confessed that the most advantaged in terms of higher education only 6 per cent. of state school pupils aged 15 progressed participation in recent years, but we want to go further, to Russell group universities. Of those few, just one in for example by supporting many of the recommendations 10 are from the bottom two socio-economic groups. It is in the recent report by the panel on fair access to the clear that very few such students get to our longest professions chaired by my right hon. Friend the Member established universities. Vitally, many from more for Darlington (Mr. Milburn). disadvantaged backgrounds study HE in FE, but we know from an answer just this morning that this figure Dr. Starkey: I thank the Minister for that answer. is falling too. So is the Government’s expensive Aimhigher Increasing additional student numbers is incredibly programme a failure, or are the answers to the parliamentary important to constituencies such as mine in Milton questions inadvertently incorrect? It must be one or the Keynes where there is a relatively low participation rate other: is it failure or fallacy? in higher education. Can the Minister give me any good news about the expansion of the new university centre Mr. Lammy: Universities, parents and students up in Milton Keynes and perhaps about having additional and down the country will be very nervous that a student numbers for those who are studying HE in Conservative Government would cut Aimhigher. The further education colleges? socio-economic gap between those in the highest and lowest groups is down by 7 per cent., while participation Mr. Lammy: I congratulate my hon. Friend on her from the poorest neighbourhoods in the country doughty championing of extending universities’ reach and from state schools is up. All that is against the across Milton Keynes. Milton Keynes is offering higher backdrop of the Conservatives slashing funding for education to more students through the Open university universities. We have seen an increase of 25 per cent. in than any other university in the country. My hon. the participation rate, so will the hon. Gentleman commit Friend was lucky and successful in her bid to extend to a 50 per cent.— that reach to mature students and part-time students in Milton Keynes. Additional student numbers are of course an issue for the funding council, but I know that the Mr. Speaker: Order. I gently say to the Minister of business plan, as it comes forward, will make that case State that the purpose of Question Time is for questions even stronger. to be put to Ministers, rather than to members of the Opposition. Stephen Williams (Bristol, West) (LD): It is probably common ground between those on all three Front Benches Mr. Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): My that there is a problem of fair access to some of our right hon. Friend knows that I have been campaigning research-intensive universities and to particular courses. for fair access for many years, but can we ensure that Does the Minister not accept that the brave new world fair access means that students are suitably qualified for which he is preparing the ground, with the connivance and that they can speak and write English properly? In of those on the Conservative Front Bench, with fully addition, do they not need to work a bit harder, as at variable market fees after the next general election will present the average student in our universities does not make those barriers even harder for people from poorer work hard enough? backgrounds to leap? Mr. Lammy: I am going to take every opportunity to Mr. Lammy: My hon.