Education and Skills Bill

The noble Baroness uses emotive words. Am I saying that there should ultimately be a sanction for those who are not participating, in the context of significantly improved provision and of Clause 39, which ensures that reasonable excuses will be entertained and that there is a proper process? Yes, I do believe that it is appropriate that there should be such a sanction in the context of the overpowering need for higher rates of participation in education and training for the good of the individuals concerned and of the country. Finally, at this late hour, I return the question to the noble Baroness. I would be very interested to know whether she thinks it would be good for the country and for the individuals themselves that they do not participate in education and training simply as a quid pro quo for our not having to take on board the duties set out in the Bill. If that is her view, we have a fundamental disagreement, which I look forward to rehearsing further on Report. The arguments that she would then set out about the freedom for people not to engage and about this being a matter for the individual and not for the state were precisely those used against raising the school leaving age in the 1960s and the move towards compulsory primary education by the late Victorians. I have no doubt that when future generations look at these debates, they will realise that the cause of progress lay on the side of those who were prepared to invest significantly in increased education and training provision for 16, 17 and 18 year-olds and were ultimately prepared to make it a responsibility of those young people to invest in their own future.