Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill

I am grateful to the Minister for responding to this amendment. In relation to paragraph (a) in Amendment 198, if the only objection is that it does not refer to those in adult detention, I would point out to him that encouraging individuals to undergo post-19 education and training comprehends all individuals whether they are in detention or not. I do not think it can be said that it excludes those in detention. Members of the Bill team seem to be a little uncertain about whether Clauses 84 and 88—particularly Clause 84—comprehend those outside adult detention. The wording is ambiguous. Yesterday the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, took my amendments to apply only to those who are in adult detention, and I was a little taken aback by it. Clause 84’s heading— ""Education and training for persons aged 19 or over and others subject to adult detention"—" is ambiguous, and if we are uncertain, the greater public might be even more uncertain. The Minister did not respond to my suggestion that there would be an advantage in monitoring whether the chief executive of the Skills Funding Agency was fulfilling this remit to encourage individuals and employers to encourage participation in post-19 education. If this remit is created, it is worth checking on from time to time. On the other two amendments and the whole issue of regional development agencies and their role, the Minister claims first that the situation is basically much the same as before the Mandelson letter. Yet the letter itself says: ""I can confirm that I am considering the case for modifying the existing plans for the creation of the Skills Funding Agency … to allow the existing skills landscape to be simplified by making the RDAs the single body with responsibility for producing the regional skills strategy"."