My Lords, we welcome the Government's amendments. On our second day in Committee, my noble friend Lady Perry commented that, ""11 noble Lords have put their names to amendments that in one way or another ask that Clause 35 repeat the requirement that information about apprenticeships should be given to all young people, not only those for whom it is in their best interests".—[Official Report, 24/6/09; col. 1634.]"
We are pleased that the Government have taken those objections on board and have returned with a clause that meets those concerns.
We have cited these statistics before, but it is worth calling on them again. The 2008 YouGov poll on this issue showed that only 24 per cent of teachers felt that apprenticeships were a good alternative to A-levels. In contrast, 55 per cent of employers and 52 per cent of young people felt that they were just as good an option. It is important that pupils do not miss out on advice regarding both vocational and academic options. We are delighted that the Government have accepted the argument here and tabled amendments conceding that point—accepting that our approach, and that of so many around the House, is more appropriate.
However, we on these Benches feel that the clause still represents a missed opportunity. It is no secret that we feel that about many parts of the Bill. Nevertheless, in this context, I shall concentrate on the careers service. The Government propose amendments to the Education Act that would ensure that the provision of a programme of careers education includes information on education, training and apprenticeships. They have not, however, taken the opportunity to make statutory and effective changes to the careers education system.
As things stand, in about two-thirds of schools in England, careers advice is given by teachers with no professional qualification in the field. Further advice may come from the Connexions service, which replaced the careers service in 2001. Although Connexions can provide useful services and advice, a recent study by the Skills Commission has shown that, ""there has been a decline in the quality of careers advice since Connexions replaced the Careers Service"."
Moreover, the Government's own new guidance paper, Quality, Choice and Aspiration—A Strategy for Young People’s Information, Advice and Guidance, states that, ""there is evidence to suggest that the quality of IAG"—"
information, advice and guidance—"varies quite considerably". Again, the Government’s guidance cites a recent online study by the British Youth Council, the National Children's Bureau, and Young NCB, which found that only just under 20 per cent of respondents rated the formal career advice they received as "very helpful". Although the Connexions service has achieved many good things, it clearly needs improving radically. Some of the difficulty may be that Connexions is expected to provide such a wide range of advice over such a wide remit, from health to relationship advice, to money and housing. Connexions has the capacity to give very good careers advice, but one wonders if it is spread too thin.
In response to these difficulties the Government’s new guidance paper suggests reviews, consultations and task forces. We therefore feel that this Bill, and indeed this guidance, has missed an opportunity to reinvent careers advice. These amendments go some way to reassuring noble Lords that the advice given will be impartial between academic and vocational careers paths. Nevertheless, they do not get to the heart of the matter, which would be to improve careers advice specifically. In contrast to these reviews and task forces and promises to look at the problems which mean that under 20 per cent of the survey respondents feel that the advice they received was "very helpful", we on these Benches have said clearly that we would change the system. There is a call for a professional, impartial careers adviser in every secondary school and college. Teachers should not be saddled with the extra burden of having to provide advice on careers. A fully trained and qualified professional body should offer young people all the help they need. Indeed, we would also institute a new and professional all-age careers advice service that would provide community-based sources of advice and guidance for people of all ages. In this way there would be a revolution in the way that people give and receive advice on the options available to them.
We are delighted to accept the Government’s concessions, but we feel that while these amendments help to prevent further dangers to careers advice which the ambiguous old Clause 36 could have brought in, they do not go nearly far enough.
Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord De Mauley
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 2 November 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
714 c43-5 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:41:16 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_590712
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_590712
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_590712