Clause 130

10:15 am

Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Schools and Learners), Department for Children, Schools and Families; Portsmouth North, Labour)

I beg to move amendment 442, in clause 130, page 75, line 19, at end insert—

‘(c) recognition in respect of credits in respect of different components of qualifications or different descriptions of components of qualifications.’.

Joan Humble (Blackpool North and Fleetwood, Labour)

With this it will be convenient to take Government amendment 443.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Schools and Learners), Department for Children, Schools and Families; Portsmouth North, Labour)

The amendments are technical. They ensure that Ofqual’s powers to set criteria for recognitions and general conditions will apply to components in the same way as they do to full qualifications.

We need flexible ways for people to learn and obtain qualifications. Increasingly, we are seeing learners, particularly adult learners, developing their skills and knowledge through building up a portfolio of components of qualifications, which can then be put together to make full qualifications. The amendments will ensure that all achievements are properly recognised. The Bill will allow Ofqual to recognise employers as awarding bodies so that an even greater variety of learning can be recognised and valued. The amendments complement those powers by ensuring that Ofqual is as much the regulator of components of qualifications as of full qualifications.

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

As the Minister helpfully said, the amendments allow Ofqual to set up criteria for recognition that will not just depend on qualifications or descriptions of qualifications, and we welcome that move. Essentially, they enable Ofqual to do what it says on the tin, as it were. We must ensure that Ofqual is a valid and independent body with a robust ability to accredit a range of qualifications and awarding bodies. The amendments, in those terms, are welcome—they move in the right direction, ensuring that all aspects of qualifications are accredited.

We would be churlish to oppose the amendments, but a couple of questions come to mind, and it would be wrong if they were not shared with the Committee. First, how small a set of credits can Ofqual accredit? Does the Minister have an optimum, notional idea of that—I assume that she must? While we want to ensure that there are such regulations, we do not want Ofqual to get bogged down in accrediting every single piece of work. Secondly, is there a clear plan for what qualifications will be involved and a timetable for their accreditation? It would be little use if qualifications were accredited and the acquisition of credits took some time to accredit.

I was going to ask further questions about the Government’s response to the report of the Select Committee on Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills to which I referred earlier, particularly in respect of the comments made by that Committee on Ofqual and the Government response. In fairness to the Minister, she has already admitted that she has not read it. I read  it after a very good dinner in Chinatown last night, but clearly she did not have a good dinner in Chinatown or read the report.

The report is relevant, however, as the Select Committee made several recommendations, particularly in respect of giving consideration to qualifications, the reform process, and the accreditation of prior learning to accommodate non-traditional courses leading to the acquisition of skills at an appropriate level. It was referring to “bite-size courses”, part-time courses and formal training. Notwithstanding that, the easiest way for me to conclude my remarks would be once again to advise the Minister to prepare better in the future—home-study preparation is seldom wasted—and, more graciously perhaps, to suggest that I would be happy to receive a written response on that particular aspect of the response to the Select Committee.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Schools and Learners), Department for Children, Schools and Families; Portsmouth North, Labour)

I assure the hon. Gentleman that I certainly was not wasting my time last night. I was at an event for the London leadership strategy with head teachers and deputy head teachers of our London schools. I was congratulating them on the excellent progress and improvement that they have made since the London Challenge was put in place.

David Laws (Yeovil, Liberal Democrat)

Until what time?

Sarah McCarthy-Fry (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Schools and Learners), Department for Children, Schools and Families; Portsmouth North, Labour)

After that I went home and read my papers for this Committee. I can assure hon. Members that at no time was I in Chinatown enjoying a good dinner.

In response to the questions asked by the hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings, those matters will be up to Ofqual. The timing will be up to Ofqual, which will have an overarching duty to ensure standards and comparability. It will be a risk-based regulator. I am sure that I will spend the time between the end of this sitting and the next one perusing the document to which the hon. Gentleman referred and not having a good lunch, as I am sure that he will.

David Laws (Yeovil, Liberal Democrat)

I beg to move amendment 222, in clause 130, page 75, line 22, after ‘consult’, insert ‘recognised awarding bodies and’.

Joan Humble (Blackpool North and Fleetwood, Labour)

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: amendment 224, in clause 137, page 78, line 8, after ‘consult’, insert ‘relevant recognised awarding bodies and’.

Amendment 199, in clause 137, page 78, line 9, at end add

‘and must include in such consultations representatives of the higher education sector and representatives of business.’.

Amendment 225, in clause 140, page 80, line 7, after ‘consult’, insert ‘relevant recognised awarding bodies and’.

David Laws (Yeovil, Liberal Democrat)

I hope that we can deal with the amendment briefly and that the Minister may be able to give me the type of reassurances that she could about amendments 221 and 223.

All the amendments are complementary and deal with the issue of the need for Ofqual to consult before setting or revising the criteria for recognition. Clause 130(5) states:

“Before setting or revising the criteria Ofqual must consult such persons as it considers appropriate.”

We hope that that consultation would include the recognised awarding bodies, which is what the amendments seek to achieve. It is important for Ofqual to take into account the expertise and practical knowledge of the awarding bodies.