Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill

This has been a fascinating debate. The Minister asked a few minutes ago, in a somewhat pained voice, whether we really want examinations to be offered at a reasonable price. Yes, we do. In Amendment 233, we ask for value for money and in Amendment 234, we ask for rises within inflation, yet the Minister will not accept them. He suggests that both opposition parties have perhaps been listening a little too closely to the awarding bodies. The Minister is aware that both opposition parties have been lobbied by all the awarding bodies, and of course we have listened to them; that is our job. When a piece of legislation comes before us, we have a duty to listen to the people who are affected by it, but the Minister underestimates the brains and independence of mind of both opposition parties if he suggests that we are just the mouthpieces of such organisations. If he wants to dispute that, he only has to look at the amendments in this group that have been tabled by both opposition parties on fee-capping and he will find that those amendments lie perfectly within the political philosophies of those parties. He will find that the Conservative Party wants to get rid of fee-capping altogether, but we on these Benches do not agree with that. We on these Benches have agreed that it may be necessary to use fee-capping very selectively; however, we ask not for a sledgehammer, as the Minister has suggested, but a very reasonable review of the marketplace and of the need for such fee-capping before it is put into place. There should also be a proper appeals process to an appropriate person. The Minister has not yet replied to my question about the criteria that Ofqual will use to decide whether fee-capping is required, but I accept that he will write to me. I very much echo the words of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas. He took the words right out of my mouth when he said that it is inconceivable that Ofqual would have to start from scratch when reviewing the marketplace in order to decide whether fee-capping was necessary. Ofqual should have this information at its fingertips all the time, and it should not take it very long to review the marketplace and decide whether fee-capping is genuinely necessary without stifling innovation. Of the three stages—the three hoops, as the Minister put it—that Ofqual would have to jump through before fee-capping, the third is a review by a suitable independent person. I can think of no one more appropriate to be that independent person than the competition commissioner—the person to whom the awarding bodies should have recourse in our Amendment 251A. Clearly, our appeals on both sides of the fence on fee-capping are falling on the Minister’s deaf ears this evening, so we will have to think carefully about what to do with these amendments before Report. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 233 withdrawn. Amendments 234 to 236 not moved. Clause 125 agreed. Clause 126 : General duties Amendment 237 not moved.