John Hayes (Shadow Minister, Innovation, Universities and Skills; South Holland & The Deepings, Conservative)

We have raced through the last few clauses, but it seems unreasonable to deny the Minister the opportunity to contribute further to our deliberations, given his outstanding performance when he agreed with me previously and again today. I shall not offer any plaudits—he said earlier that he was seeking plaudits—unless they are fully deserved.

The clause applies to both England and Wales. The apprenticeship agreement will be a contract entered into between the employer and the apprentice. The Government expect it to set out both the on-the-job training and the learning away from the work stations that will be delivered. My first question is a reprise of a question that came up in an earlier Committee sitting and is about the quantification of those terms. Are we going to measure or stipulate the time spent on the job? We have debated that briefly, but I would like it to be clear. The logic of the clause and this part of the Bill seems to suggest that we should. The contract will make clear what role an apprentice will be qualified to hold on completion, and it will stipulate the supervision that an apprentice will receive throughout the period of apprenticeship.

That brings me to my second question, which is about the quality as well as the quantity of supervision. I paint a picture—some might call it a romantic one—that  for me sums up, describes and illustrates what an apprenticeship is in the eyes of most laymen, and what it should be in the eyes of those who believe strongly in the apprenticeship system. It is a picture of a willing learner, learning a craft or skill at the side—some might argue at the feet—of an experienced craftsman. We therefore need to know that that craftsman is experienced, qualified and competent to transmit the knowledge—the understanding—that we wish an apprentice to gain. We need to know how long the apprentice will be mentored and what form that mentoring will take.

Subsection (2) sets out the conditions that must be satisfied by an apprenticeship agreement. The agreement must be in a form that is to be prescribed by the Secretary of State. Subsection (3) gives the Secretary of State power

“to specify provisions that must”—

or must not—

“be included in an apprenticeship agreement”,

which is precisely why I am asking these questions. Subsection (4) enables the apprentice to enter into successive apprenticeship agreements relating to the same framework, even where that has ceased to be a recognised English framework.

Given that the clause stipulates those powers, it is important that we know how they will be realised and what they will lead to in terms of quality and quantity, and the contractual expectations of an apprentice and of those who provide training for an apprentice. I hope that the Minister will be able to elucidate, and by so doing, illuminate these matters.

Stephen Williams (Bristol West, Liberal Democrat)

I want to make different points to those raised by the hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings. Those of us who at 10.25 am rushed off to Innovation, Universities and Skills questions for a morning of deliberation on such matters, will have heard the hon. Member for Buckingham (John Bercow) ask a question about clause 30. Representations were also made to me yesterday by some non-governmental organisations that had concerns about the clause, although it was too late to table amendments for today. The main concerns were about perceived barriers for people with learning difficulties in fulfilling the requirements of an apprenticeship agreement. We touched briefly on that issue in an earlier debate, but I am asking for reassurance from the Minister that all consideration and support will be given to young people or adults with learning difficulties who wish to access an apprenticeship agreement. If necessary, an assessment should also be made of their needs in order to fulfil the requirements of the apprenticeship agreement.

As Minister for further education, he may know that many colleges do their best to ensure that they offer an inclusive education. If he has not done so already, I recommend that he goes to the National Star college outside Cheltenham, which I visited a couple of years ago. It specialises in the provision of further education and skills training for adults with special needs and learning difficulties. He will know that there is a broad spectrum of special needs and difficulties, and the hon. Member for Buckingham referred specifically to those who may be somewhere on the autistic spectrum. I am simply asking the Minister for an assurance that all consideration will be given to people with learning  difficulties or special needs and that a needs assessment will be provided, to ensure that we offer the inclusive opportunities for expanded apprenticeships provision that those on all three Front Benches want.

Siôn Simon (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills; Birmingham, Erdington, Labour)

Starting with the last point, yes, I can give the hon. Gentleman those assurances. We have talked about it. I think that my right hon. and hon. Friends will talk later about the specific provisions for people between 16 and 18 with special needs. On Tuesday, we talked about the provisions that I think are in clause 111 —I may have got the number wrong before—which lays down a duty and commits funding to ensure that nobody is excluded or disadvantaged because of a learning disability or difficulty from the many benefits of an apprenticeship.

John Hayes (Shadow Minister, Innovation, Universities and Skills; South Holland & The Deepings, Conservative)

I know that the Minister is going to deal with the substantive remarks that I made, but before he moves on I would like to address the intervention by the hon. Member for Bristol, West. First, I raised those matters on a previous occasion in Committee and the Minister pledged to come back to us with some details, inasmuch as information is collated and available, on the number of young people and others with learning difficulties and disabilities who have apprenticeships. I hope that he will reaffirm his intention to do that.

Secondly, my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham’s remarks are highly pertinent to this part of the Bill. Does the Minister expect to make the provisions for people with learning difficulties and other disabilities absolutely clear in guidance? Without that, I fear that they may be disadvantaged.

Siôn Simon (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills; Birmingham, Erdington, Labour)

I said at the time that I did not think some of the figures that the hon. Gentleman asked for were available. We are looking at the others, but we have not got them yet. The latest data are for 2007-08, when 28,900, some 12 per cent., of those starting an apprenticeship had learning difficulties and/or disabilities and 10,900, some 10 per cent., of those completing an apprenticeship had learning difficulties and/or disabilities.

The Learning and Skills Council individual learner record identifies a range of different learning disabilities and difficulties, from visual impairment and mental health difficulties to temporary disabilities after illness. For learners who consider themselves to have a learning disability or difficulty, that field of the ILR records the learner’s main disability. If a learner has more than one disability, the main one will be recorded. It would be best to address the hon. Gentleman’s comments when we discuss clause 82.

To make a little progress I shall move on to the hon. Gentleman’s opening remarks. He wanted to know to what extent we will measure and stipulate the components of the agreement. He said that we had debated those briefly” on Tuesday; we have a slightly different time sense. I thought that we had gone into those matters at some length and in some detail, but I am more than happy to repeat the position.

The number that will be specified is 280 guided learning hours, which is in the SASE document for consultation. We expect that consultation to conclude that about 250 of those guided learning hours should be at off-work stations. We do not intend it to specify  exactly what the configuration of those hours will be, or in what year they should fall; that will be a matter for employers to agree with apprentices. We do not intend to stipulate, either on the face of the Bill or in the SASE—as we went into at some length on Tuesday—the amount of time spent in the workplace. As I said several times, we consider that to be a truism: an apprenticeship is a job, an apprenticeship will always happen in the workplace.

The quality issue is partly addressed by having a minimum specification of the amount of time that has to be spent in formal tutored guided learning off the work station. The rest of the quality issues that the hon. Gentleman talked about are in, as I am sure he knows, the document that is becoming legendary in the Committee Room, “Specifications of Apprenticeship Standards for England”, which is currently out for consultation, just in case that little detail had escaped anybody. They can be found on pages 21 and 22 of the document, which the hon. Gentleman described with some wit—if I may paraphrase—as a brief and slim, yet comprehensive and almost elegant document. That is the substance of the answer to his question. Clause 30 allows us to prescribe the form, but does not impose too much detail or too much inflexibility.

John Hayes (Shadow Minister, Innovation, Universities and Skills; South Holland & The Deepings, Conservative)

First, is ministerial guidance planned on the issues of learning difficulties and disability, as that seems to be critical? Secondly, is mentoring going to be a necessary, essential part of the contract?

Siôn Simon (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills; Birmingham, Erdington, Labour)

The hon. Gentleman is to be commended on the tenacity with which he insists on detailed answers to his pertinent questions, the answer to both of which is yes.