How he intends to ensure that people from ethnic minorities have equal access to the new deal. [43751]

Ethnic minorities will, of course, have the same entitlements as anyone else to all aspects of the new deal. For the first time in employment programmes, we have brought in ethnic monitoring, and we are working closely with ethnic minority groups and businesses. Trained personal advisers will help to tackle both barriers to employment and the discrimination that ethnic minorities face. A key priority of the new deal is to ensure full and fair opportunities for people, whatever their ethnic origin. As there are still appallingly high levels of unemployment among black and Asian people, that help is long overdue.

Does the Minister welcome the fact that three black organisations have joined up to provide gateway services? Does he agree that every local new deal partnership has a responsibility to be a true, rather than just a paper, partnership that is inclusive of all members of the local community so that people from minority ethnic organisations can have equal access to the opportunities of the new deal, and a real step forward into employment?

I agree with my hon. Friend's two good points. We are encouraging ethnic minority community groups and businesses to be involved at all levels of the new deal, and we are acting on their advice. A six-monthly review of the effectiveness of local partnerships in involving representatives of local ethnic minority communities will ensure that the new deal is reaching those clients.

What responses he has received during the period of consultation before his Department issues regulations governing partnership between local education authorities and independent schools. [43752]

We intend to begin consultation on draft regulations once the School Standards and Framework Bill receives Royal Assent.

Given that the Minister has demanded that Surrey council spends an additional 5 per cent. on education this year, while the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions has cut Surrey's funding by 1 per cent., how does he expect Surrey to meet his desire when its efforts to do so in partnership with independent schools are being hamstrung by delays caused by his own Department?

No delays are being caused by my Department. I wrote to the hon. Gentleman on 22 March and 12 May to ask for details of the scheme that is being promoted by Surrey. I regret that he has not replied to those letters or supplied me with details of the scheme. Perhaps he knows full well that Surrey's proposals have met almost universal opposition from schools in Surrey. The message to Conservative councillors in Surrey is that they should give priority to education in the county's own schools, as the Labour Government do. Those schools should be given every pound that the Government have provided to Surrey.

Who benefits from partnerships, and how?

There is the possibility, in a positive sense, to have partnerships between the independent sector and the maintained sector in a way that actually builds bridges for the benefit of all children. What the Government are not prepared to see is the sort of scheme being promoted by some authorities which seek to replace the assisted places scheme with a local variation that is not about building bridges but about reinforcing divisions. The Government believe that the time has come to put dogma to one side, and to have a school system that meets the needs of all our children, not just a few.

If he will make a statement on primary school class sizes in Leicestershire. [43753]

In January this year, the average primary class size in Leicestershire was 26. Last year, it was 26.7. Currently, 21.7 per cent. of children are in classes of more than 30. Last year, the figure was 23.4 per cent.

My figures show that the average primary class size has gone down by 0.06 of a pupil in one year. Even the Secretary of State would have to admit that it will take some time for that to work its way through to reduced class sizes. The children of most parents will have left primary school before there is any effect. What does the Secretary of State say to the 30 parents from Thistley Meadow school in Blaby who have written to me, some of whom voted Labour in the general election because they believed in Labour's pledge? When is a pledge an early pledge and when is it a late one? Was not the little card that I have with me, Labour's general election pledge card, a fraud perpetrated by new Labour on the parents of Leicestershire and the people of the United Kingdom?

Many more might have voted Labour if they had known that there would be a reduction of 0.7 per cent. in just one year [HON. MEMBERS: "0.06"] I am using the official figures. Leicestershire has received £291,000 and Leicester city £584,000 so that 4,100 children will be in smaller class sizes from September, with an extra 65 teachers.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend remembers visiting Sileby Highgate school in Leicestershire, at which I am a governor, in 1996. He will recall that all its class sizes were well over 30. That was under the previous Administration, so we do not need to take any lectures. Will he confirm what he told me in a written answer last July—that in Leicestershire the cost of the assisted places scheme for the 447 pupils who were benefiting from it was £1.49 million? Does he agree that that money is much better spent on reducing class sizes in Leicestershire schools, particularly Sileby Highgate?

I agree with my hon. Friend. That is why those who buy private education put tremendous emphasis on class sizes. It ill becomes Conservative Members to proclaim that they are in favour of smaller classes for the children of those who buy private education but to be against it for the children whom they should represent.

Does the Secretary of State realise that, to implement his Government's literacy scheme, teachers are required to create a maximum of five groups of six pupils? That is 30 for every class.

Order. The question relates specifically to Leicestershire.

I assure you, Madam Speaker, that this is very much about Leicestershire. I hope that the Secretary of State is aware that his literacy scheme requires five groups of six pupils. Given that he has no plans to reduce key stage 2 classes—

Order. I am sorry but the hon. Gentleman is not accepting my guidance. I am moving on. This is about Leicestershire.

I hope it is, Madam Speaker, as I represent a Leicestershire seat. May I confirm what my right hon. Friend said about infant class sizes in the city of Leicester—that, because of the extra money that the city has received this year, there will be no infant class in excess of 30 from September this year? Does he accept that 10 per cent. of junior classes will be in excess of 30, however, and that one reason for that is that local heads and governors make the decisions on the distribution of class sizes? Will he signal his intention to offer guidance to heads and governors about the need to have smaller class sizes across the whole age group?

A prerequisite of the plans that will have to be submitted this autumn will be that reductions in class sizes will not have a knock-on effect for primary schooling as a whole. Leicester and Leicestershire will benefit from the £62 million that we have allocated for this year and from the 1,500 extra teachers. Some 100,000 children will gain from the investment that we are making nationally.

I am sure that the Secretary of State is familiar with the report of the Local Government Association, representing Leicestershire—and other parts of the country—on the devastating practical implications of the Government's class size pledge. Can the right hon. Gentleman assure parents in Leicestershire—and throughout the country—that there will be no reduction in parental choice and no increase in mixed-year teaching as a result of the Government's pledge?

We have made it absolutely clear that parental preference is a critical part of enabling people to make the right choice in sending their children to the nearest high-quality school. We have made no bones about the fact that, where there are mixed-age classes, the guidance of Ofsted and the standards unit should be followed in making them work. I find it difficult to answer the question coming from an hon. Member who has written and spoken condemning the argument about class size, suggesting,

"there is little evidence of any correlation between class size and educational achievements".

If he will make a statement on the (a) performance and (b) level of funding of Bury's schools. [43755]

Key indicators show that the performance of Bury's schools is above the England average. The level of Bury's standard spending assessment in 1998–99 was £67.8 million—an increase of 6.4 per cent. on the figure for 1997–98. That amounts to an extra £109 for every primary pupil and an extra £127 for every secondary pupil.

I thank my hon. Friend for that response. Is he aware that, before and during the election, my hon. Friends and I promised people that five, six and seven-year-olds would be taught in classes of 30 and under by about 2001, which will be towards the end of the first term of the Labour Government? Is he further aware that from September 1998, 95 per cent. of five, six and seven-year-olds in Bury will be taught in classes of 30 and under?

I offer my congratulations to those schools in Bury and the teachers responsible for the good standards that are now being achieved. I compliment my hon. Friend and his colleague my hon. Friend the Member for Bury, North (Mr. Chaytor), who have been great champions of the school system there. I am delighted to confirm that we pledged that, by the end of this Parliament, there would be no five, six or seven-year-olds in a class of 30 or more. I am delighted that, in September of this year, 3,500 fewer five, six and seven-year-olds in Bury will be in classes of more than 30. I am confident that, with that targeted support, Bury will be able to do even better for its children than it is doing now.

What advice he has given to local education authorities regarding school exclusions and the making of alternative arrangements for the education of children who are excluded; and if he will make a statement. [43757]

We have recently issued brief interim guidance on the changes to the law that come into force in September 1998. We are also preparing a new package of guidance on a range of exclusion issues that will reflect the recommendations of the truancy and school exclusion report.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, in many parts of the country, there is little or no provision for excluded school children? I am aware of a couple of cases in my constituency where children as young as 10 or 11 are left hanging around the streets for much of the day. Does my hon. Friend agree that if we allow the problem to continue, we will store up a big difficulty for ourselves in future? Will she tell us what plans we have to address this problem?

My hon. Friend is right: sadly, children who are excluded from school are often those who need the most help and more education to raise standards, but they are excluded from any educational provision. It is not only in my hon. Friend's constituency that excluded children receive no education; it is a pattern that we found throughout the country when we took office a year ago. That is why we have already made a firm commitment, coming out of the school exclusion report, that children excluded for more than three weeks will have a right to full-time and appropriate education. That will be phased in when resources allow; the resources will be there and we intend that implementation should take no longer than three years in every local education authority throughout the country.

Most parents, teachers and governors are concerned not about school exclusions but about when the Labour Government are going to deliver on the pledge they made at the general election to reduce class sizes. Class sizes in Bury might be going down, simply because there is substantially—

Order. The question is not about class sizes.

No, Madam Speaker; it is about school exclusions. The Government are making a lot of what they are doing about exclusions, but my point is that people in Oxfordshire are not coming up to me and expressing their concern about exclusions of children in Oxfordshire. They are concerned about when the Government are going to deliver on their policy and pledge to reduce class sizes—

Order. Thank you very much.

What assistance he proposes to give to those universities that wish to increase the numbers of students from mainstream comprehensives. [43760]

From this autumn, we are doubling access funds and, from September, universities will be able to use a proportion of those funds to provide support and help for new access, and not merely for hardship among those who are already at university. We are also working with the university sector as a whole to link individual universities with schools and their communities, so that pupils can experience university life well in advance of deciding from the options available.

That is quite a good answer, but my right hon. Friend could do better. We need to acknowledge the seriousness of the fact that the best universities for teaching and research are dominated by entrants from the private sector, from the best grammar schools, from comprehensives in affluent areas of the country and from sixth-form colleges. In the top 40 to 50 universities, the continued exclusion of students from average comprehensives who get three As at A-level is a national tragedy and a scandal. Will my right hon. Friend put the profile on the matter and make it a top priority to get something done about it?

I shall try to do better, and will do so by following what we are already doing, which is holding detailed meetings with the university sector and the Higher Education Funding Council to achieve precisely what my hon. Friend rightly wants. It is true that in the West Riding of Yorkshire, in which his constituency used to be incorporated, more students from comprehensive schools went to Oxford and Cambridge in the days of Alec Clegg than do so now. The way to achieve a real transformation is not only to increase expectations and get the universities to be more embracing in their admissions policy but to transform the standard of education in schools so that every child has that chance.

Is it the right hon. Gentleman's view that more students will go to university from mainstream comprehensives as a result of the introduction of tuition fees and the abolition of the maintenance grant? On reflection, does he not bitterly regret that it is under a Labour Government that our state education system will become no longer free at the point of access?

I bitterly regret the fact that the Conservatives put a cap on entry to higher education; that they cut the unit cost by 40 per cent. and reduced quality; and that they did not concentrate on lifting standards for all children in our schools to get them into university. I am pleased that, from this autumn, an extra 1 per cent. of those leaving school—comprehensive or otherwise—are taking up higher education. We have every intention of extending that in future.

Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating King's college, Cambridge, which admits more than 90 per cent. of its students from the state sector? Does he welcome Cambridge university's advertising campaign to encourage more students from the state sector to apply?

Yes, I applaud what is being done by King's college and by students at Cambridge, who are reaching out—visiting, linking with and mentoring students in schools across the country. I just wish that it were happening in all colleges and all universities.

May I tell the Secretary of State that my book, "Why Vote Conservative?" has a companion volume, "Why Vote Labour?", which has much less to say about raising educational standards? Following his letter to me yesterday about university applications, will he confirm that, during the debate on the Teaching and Higher Education Bill, Ministers deployed statistics that were embargoed by the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service and showed that the proposed introduction of tuition fees is having a significant impact in reducing applications to Scottish universities from English students?

I am inclined to read from another of the hon. Gentleman's books, "Is Conservatism Dead?"—the answer to which is yes. The answer to his question is no. Ministers did not use embargoed information. As I told him in the letter, the information was not made available until 4.30 pm on Tuesday, so Ministers could not have used it.

What plans he has to modify teacher qualifications to take account of shortages. [43761]

Ensuring that there are sufficient, well-trained, high-quality teachers is central to our aim to raise standards. We have no plans to boost recruitment by lowering the entry requirements to the profession.

The hon. Lady will be aware from correspondence between us of some hard cases concerning the transition between the licensed and the registered teachers schemes, and difficulties when somebody wishes to teach at primary level but does not have a degree in one of the national curriculum subjects. Nobody in the House would wish in any way to devalue the qualified teacher status or to reduce standards, but, given the growing teacher shortage, does she agree that is essential that the rules are interpreted as flexibly as possible to ensure that willing teachers are not deterred from the profession of their choice?

For once, I am in total agreement with the hon. Gentleman. I assure him that his constituent, Miss Morgan, who, if my memory serves me correctly, is seeking a place on a bachelor of education course, is fully entitled to do so given her degree. I am happy to reassure the House and those beyond it that nothing in the entry requirements to initial teacher training demands that one must have a degree in a national curriculum subject. Of course, by the end of the training course, one must have the necessary subject knowledge in order to teach effectively, but there is no bar to ITT if one does not have a degree in a national curriculum subject. If any hon. Member knows of any constituent who finds such a difficulty when they apply for teacher training, I would be most grateful to hear of it and would make the Government's views known directly to the initial teacher training institute concerned.

Will my hon. Friend look at the process of postgraduate certificates of education and of the clearing house through the graduate teacher training regime, as some things do not seem to match in that area? The entire process seems to be becoming disreputable.

My hon. Friend is right; the subject needs looking at. There is a problem about the timing of applications and the way in which different institutions deal with them. We are determined that those who wish to apply for teacher training are able to do so as easily as possible and that institutions providing courses can choose the best and most suitable candidates. I am not entirely convinced that that is happening at the moment; we have the matter under review.

Does the Minister accept that the problem of teacher shortages is creating a growing crisis in our schools? Yesterday, it was reported that the chief inspector of schools, Chris Woodhead, called on the Government to take action to redress the problem. So far, the Government have produced a cinema advertisement and a plan for what the Minister for School Standards describes today in The Sun as a "super teacher grade", which is creating much concern in staff rooms. Will the Minister guarantee that, during this Parliament, there will not only be sufficient teachers to stand up in front of pupils in schools across the country but every child in a secondary school will be taught in every subject by a teacher who is a specialist in that subject?

I welcome the hon. Lady to her position on the Front Bench. This is the first opportunity that I have had to do so, although we have spent many months in Committee together, and I feel that we already know each other reasonably well. I remind her that being new to the Front Bench does not mean that she can wipe away 18 years of Conservative Government. Her comments were amazing coming from somebody whose Government left a crisis in teacher recruitment. Year after year, we saw the number of people applying for teacher training courses decreasing, and the previous Government took no action.

What plans he has to promote equal opportunities for ethnic minorities in training and employment. [43762]

We attach great importance to ensuring that people from ethnic minorities are not disadvantaged in training and employment. The Department for Education and Employment is committed to mainstreaming race equality in all our policies, programmes and services. That is part of our strategy across Government to build an inclusive society.

Does the Minister agree that it is unacceptable that half of London's young black men are unemployed? Is he aware that there is genuine concern that the training and enterprise councils are not tailoring all their employment and training programmes to meet the skills deficit of young black men? Will he give us an assurance that he will review the TECs' performance in that respect, in consultation with representatives of black and ethnic minority groups?

I share my hon. Friend's deep concern about the problem she describes, which is particularly severe in London. The rates of unemployment among people from ethnic minorities are twice as high as those for white people. Across the country, the position deteriorated during the last 10 years of Conservative Government, but it is particularly concerning among young black people, for whom, as my hon. Friend says, the figure is vastly higher. I congratulate her on her strong personal commitment to improving equal opportunities in the part of London that she represents and to supporting our strategy across the country.

I remind the Minister that he was a Minister in the very Government to whom he referred. Will he confirm that the way to improve job opportunities for black people and other ethnic minorities in London and elsewhere is to instil in them a work ethic and improve their job and training opportunities, not to introduce a quota system for employers?

I should be sad to think that the hon. Gentleman was complacent about the position that the previous Conservative Government allowed to develop; I was not, as he knows. There is no question of imposing quotas. We are determined to ensure equal opportunities because Labour Members find racial discrimination abhorrent.

Does my hon. Friend agree that, if we are to keep faith with black and Asian communities, we must give the matter the highest priority? Will he look again at the modern apprenticeship scheme, where only 2 per cent. of the participants are black and Asian young people?

My right hon. Friend is right: we must do very much better in a range of Government-funded and training and enterprise council-delivered programmes. I accept the anxiety that he expresses about the poor performance of members of ethnic minorities in modern apprenticeships.

What plans he has to allow part-time further education and higher education students to have access to income-contingent loans. [43765]

The Teaching and Higher Education Bill contains provisions that will give the Government the power to make support available to part-time students by way of income-contingent loans.

On 21 April, the Under-Secretary of State for Education and Employment, the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Dr. Howells), said in the Standing Committee on the Teaching and Higher Education Bill that the Government intended to move to resource accounting in 2001–02 and to use the student loan debt as a "balance sheet asset". Can the Minister confirm that? In those circumstances, what earthly reason is there for not allowing part-time students to have access to income-contingent loans from 2001?

The year 2001 will take care of itself when it arrives. We must give the Government the power to provide part-time students with access to income-contingent loans. The Bill enables us to do that. In 2001, we may be able to make the finances available to secure access to those loans.

One of the great things that we did this century was to create the Open university. Will Open university students qualify for part-time funding?

Open university students will be in the position of other part-time students. The year 2001 may well be the time when they will have access to income-contingent loans. They will have access to the new measures announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on Monday, and that will make a real difference to many of them.

What was the real-terms percentage change per pupil in the education standard spending assessment of Worcestershire for 1998–99 compared to 1997–98. [43766]

The real-terms increase was 1.85 per cent. per primary pupil and 1.21 per cent. per secondary pupil. That amounts to an extra £94 for every primary pupil and an extra £106 for every secondary pupil.

Does the Minister understand that, notwithstanding those figures, school budgets are being cut? Most parents, teachers and governors in Worcestershire think that, when the Prime Minister spoke of "education, education, education", he meant "education cut, education cut, education cut". Will the Minister give an early—preferably urgent—pledge that, next year, Worcestershire will have an increase at least equal to that of other education authorities, and preferably more, to make up for this year's frankly shocking settlement?

The hon. Gentleman is letting his prejudices get in the way of fact. The reality is that an extra £106 will be provided for every secondary pupil in Worcestershire this year. That stands in stark contrast to what occurred in the five years between 1992 and 1997—a period in which the hon. Gentleman was a Conservative Member of Parliament for Worcestershire—when there was a real-terms cut of £177 for every secondary school pupil in Worcestershire. The facts are simple: in the last five years of the Conservative Government, there was a real-terms cut of £177 for secondary pupils in Worcestershire, and, one year into a Labour Government, there has been an increase of £106 for every secondary age pupil in Worcestershire. Those are the facts—not the prejudice of Opposition Members.

What plans he has to help unemployed people over the age of 25 years move from benefits into work. [43767]

On 29 June, the new deal for those aged 25 and over who have been out of work for more than two years will get under way across the country. That will be another manifesto promise kept. In addition, in November we shall start pilot programmes bringing more intensive help to those who have been out of work for 18 months or a year. We have also introduced five prototype employment zones, which began in February.

Does the Minister agree that the extra £100 million for the long-term unemployed will help my constituent Maureen Wells? She has been a carer since she was a newly wed and now wishes to take her place in the work force, but she must have her self-esteem and employability improved. Will the new deal partnership help her and give her the time to sort herself out so that she may take her rightful place in full employment?

Yes, indeed. A very important feature—and, according to the evidence so far, a very effective feature—of the new deal is that unemployed people are receiving personal counselling with the continuity of support that a dedicated personal adviser can provide, coupled with access to a range of specialist advice and help, including training courses. That support will be available for the long-term unemployed under the new deal which starts on 29 June and under the pilots, which have been announced for November and to which my hon. Friend referred.

Will the Minister do two things for unemployed people over 25 who live in the Ribble Valley? First, will he congratulate Skillshare—an organisation of volunteers and others who provide education for the over-25s, among others, and allows people to share their skills with the unemployed so that they have a better chance of education or employment? Secondly, will he contact Lancashire county council, because that Labour-controlled authority is stopping the £26,000 in funding for Skillshare? The organisation will close at the end of the month unless the county council continues that funding, which is essential for the unemployed in my area.

I join the hon. Gentleman in congratulating organisations such as Skillshare and other voluntary and community bodies that are dedicated to the education and training needs of the unemployed. They certainly need support, and they are getting it through the new deal.

The Minister referred to pilot schemes for those who have been unemployed for a long time. Is he aware that many people who have suffered long-term unemployment have complex personal problems and difficulties? For example, many of them do not have great levels of literacy. Will the Minister ensure that assistance is given to people with literacy difficulties to help them enter a technological and increasingly information-based employment market?

Yes. The assessment of the basic skills help that people need is an important feature of the gateway in the pilots which will begin in November. It is crucial that appropriate, effective and high-quality courses are available for the older and long-term unemployed as well as for the young unemployed so that they may achieve those skills that are a key component of employability and can do so much to enhance their prospects of gaining rewarding work.

Why are the Government providing relatively less help for the unemployed who are over 25, when all the evidence shows that they are much more likely to need help to find work? Does that not suggest a gap between pious rhetoric of the policy and policy itself, which is dictated largely by short-term presentational gimmicks?

First, I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his appointment to the Front Bench.

What plans he has to review arrangements for home-to-school transport. [43768]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has no plans to review the arrangements for the provision of home-to-school transport.

Given the large amount of money that some local authorities are forced to spend on school transport—Somerset, for example, has to spend £5.3 million, which is £26,000 a day, on bussing children around—and, given that the precise distances involved, such as the two-mile and three-mile limits, and the appropriateness of particular routes are major bones of contention between local authorities and families with children, does the Minister agree that it is time that the Education Act 1944 was thoroughly reviewed to consider the provision of a comprehensive and fairer system of school transport?

I appreciate that school transport is an important issue for local authorities in constituencies such as the hon. Gentleman's. It is one of the issues to which they must give careful consideration when allocating resources.

None the less, my hon. Friend might have a gentle word with some local authorities about the quality of school transport. Although some counties are working hard to ensure that no contracts are handed out to substandard firms, does she agree that some buses that are on the road carrying school children need to be put off it as soon possible?

My hon. Friend is right. She has a long-standing interest in the issue. The Department keeps it under review, and will continue to do so.

But this Labour Government cut a £4.3 million grant to Bedfordshire county council which the previous Conservative Government gave to it. It is likely that school transport will be cut in Bedfordshire, because the Government have cut the money to it. Will the hon. Lady consider the money that rural parts of Britain are receiving from the Government, and do better? Rural parts of Bedfordshire need help, which the previous Conservative Government gave but which this Labour Government have denied.

The hon. Gentleman has a bit of a cheek. One reason why school transport was cut year after year was that, year after year, local authorities had to manage with a diminishing budget from the Conservative Government. Local authorities now have more money to spend on education—an extra £850 million this year, which means that they will be able to decide to put money into school transport, as well as into school standards.

Does the Minister agree that it is important not just to provide transport for school children, but to enable them to walk and cycle to school? Is the Department working closely with the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions to develop the safe routes to schools scheme that would enable children to arrive safely at school, and also make an important contribution to reducing the amount of road traffic?

The hon. Gentleman is right to ask that question. My Department has been working closely with Transport Ministers on the forthcoming White Paper. Making it safe for children to walk to school is crucial. There has been a massive increase in the number of children who are being driven to school, often for very short distances and to destinations that are not on their parents' way to work. We want to encourage children to walk to school, but we know that we cannot do that unless we can ensure that conditions are as safe as possible. That is what parents want and have a right to expect.

When he plans to extend the new deal to older workers in north-east Lincolnshire. [43769]

The new deal for people aged 25 and over will start on 29 June. In addition, the area will benefit from the November new deal pilots, as South Humber is one of the districts in which the private sector has been invited to tender. We are consulting on the content of that programme.

This is mildly sycophantic on the Mackinlay scale, but I am delighted with my right hon. Friend's answer. I know that he is determined to extend the benefits of the new deal to older workers who need and deserve the boost—the help and support—that he has been giving to the young unemployed.

I agree with, and welcome, my hon. Friend's commendation of the programme, and its relevance to the needs of his constituents. I assure him that, whatever is the private sector lead, it will—together with the new deal partnership—engage in close consultation with the local community and local business to ensure that the particular needs of those older long-term unemployed people are dealt with effectively, and in a way that conforms to the high-quality standards that are the hallmark of the new deal.

Does the Minister agree that, in north-east Lincolnshire, as elsewhere—

Order. Not "as elsewhere". The question applies specifically to north-east Lincolnshire.

rose—

I call the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh). He represents Lincolnshire.

In view of the particularly helpful question put to him by the hon. Member for Great Grimsby (Mr. Mitchell), will the Minister consider extending the new deal to him in the forthcoming Government reshuffle? Some of us admire the hon. Gentleman.

We all admire my hon. Friend the Member for Great Grimsby. As for the needs of the part of Lincolnshire to which the hon. Member for Gainsborough has referred, partnerships in the new deal across the country have been invited to bid to have the opportunity to be one of the 20 pilots alongside the private sector pilots to which I referred. We shall evaluate those bids against the effectiveness and quality of what they offer the local community, and how much innovation they show in working with local authorities, training and enterprise councils and local private business.

If he will make a statement on the number of new students at British universities (a) starting in autumn 1998 and (b) who started in autumn 1997. [43771]

Some 507,000 students domiciled in England started either full or part-time courses in 1997. It is too early to say how many students will start in autumn 1998, but I am sure that the House will be delighted to know that, so far, applications from 18 to 21-year-olds have increased this year compared with last year.

It is pretty poor that the Government do not know how many students will be going to university this autumn. Given the need for overall planning and budgeting, I see no reason why the figures should not be available. If, as I suspect, there is no increase, does the Minister attribute the outcome to the unwise changes that the Government have made, such as the introduction of tuition fees and those made as a result of the Government's particular interpretation of the Dearing report?

There are two principal reasons why I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the figures for this autumn. First, the A-level results are not yet known, which is a significant factor for entry into university. Secondly, mature students are applying ever later in the cycle. This year, as in previous years, mature students are applying far closer to the start date than they did a few years ago. It ill becomes a Conservative Member to talk about access to higher education when his party not only starved the sector of resources, but put a 30 per cent. cap on the number of young people who could enter higher education. That was not merely a bureaucratic cap; it was a cap on the aspirations of tens of thousands of young people who had the qualifications but who, under a Conservative Government, never had the opportunity of going on to higher education, which their talents and abilities merited. No more of that under this Government: we shall extend and expand higher education. No more caps on aspirations: we shall meet the needs and desires of young people.

On Monday evening, during the debate on the Teaching and Higher Education Bill, in response to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (Mrs. Campbell), the shadow Secretary of State said that the Conservative party would introduce top-up fees. To be fair to him, he said that it would not be widespread. When challenged to say what areas would be included, he would not answer. Would not top-up fees have a detrimental effect and prevent wider access to higher education?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The hon. Member who now speaks for the Conservative party on education matters wants to create an Ivy League of university establishments, which would divide the sector. As a result, many young people would not be able to go to the university of their choice. That is a good example of the policies pursued by the Conservative party, and it shows why the Conservatives will not be returned to office until they recognise the plot, which for education is quality provision in schools, further education colleges and universities for all our young people, not just for a few.

When he plans to publish an employment impact assessment of the effect of the EU tobacco advertising directive on UK employment. [43772]

A preliminary regulatory appraisal was produced as part of the parliamentary scrutiny of the EU proposals and was deposited in the Library on 2 December. An updated assessment, including any employment effects, will be included in the White Paper, which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health will publish later this year.

I thank the Minister for that response. Does he share my concern that an employment impact assessment after the Government decided to support the directive is of questionable value? Does he further share my concern that the Employment Commissioner, Mr. Padraig Flynn, has explicitly ruled out conducting an employment impact assessment across the European Union? If the Government think that such an assessment is worth doing, why does not the Commission?

As I think the hon. Gentleman should know, when the Select Committee on European Legislation and Standing Committee B examined this proposal, they debated these matters in great detail and decided that the proper procedure had been complied with throughout. The hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends should take note of the fact that 61 per cent. of respondents to the 1996 Office for National Statistics attitudes survey said that they did not think tobacco advertising should be allowed. The Government are not only implementing an important manifesto commitment, but going with the will of the people and implementing proposals that will be good for the public's health.

We cannot disregard the employment implications altogether, but is it not somewhat sad that Conservative Members still do not believe that tobacco advertising has implications for the health of our constituents. We only have to look at what is happening in our hospitals—the deaths, amputations and other operations—to realise that the directive is right and should be fully supported by hon. Members on both sides of the House.

My hon. Friend is right. This is a manifesto commitment. It will save lives and it is good for health. It makes sense to get on with it.

If he will meet the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals to discuss problems faced by postgraduate researchers on temporary contracts. [43773]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has not been approached by the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals on this issue. He would, of course, consider carefully any representation that it wished to make.

Are temporary contracts a satisfactory way in which to reward researchers, who may be in their 40s and 50s and who have depended on this form of remuneration all their lives?

My hon. Friend is well aware that this is a long-standing, very difficult and important problem. He will, I hope, at least share my pleasure that a concordat relating to contract researchers has been agreed between the CVCP, other bodies representing universities and colleges, the research councils, the British Academy and the Royal Society. The signatories are committed to improving the terms and conditions of employment of contract staff, to training and careers guidance, to appraising and reviewing their development and to the provision of maternity and long-term sickness benefit. A group has been established to monitor the concordat's implementation and to identify and encourage practice. It is chaired by Sir Gareth Roberts, whom my hon. Friend knows well. The group hopes to report in the autumn.