Education and Skills Bill

moved Amendment No. 115A: 115A: Clause 22, page 12, line 8, after ““may”” insert ““, if it so wishes,”” The noble Baroness said: I wish to speak also to Amendments Nos. 116A and 116B. Clause 22(1) states: "““Where a relevant local education authority is satisfied that a person (‘the employer’)””—" this whole section is about employers— "““has contravened section 21””—" which concerns providing information about whether young people are employed and carrying out the relevant training— "““the authority may by notice (a ‘penalty notice’) require the employer to pay a financial penalty””." This probing amendment seeks to do two things. First, it is concerned with the exercise of discretion of a local authority. Clause 22(1) states ““the authority may””. We wish to insert the words ““if it so wishes””. That obviously means ““may””, but we wished to explore the meaning of the subsection by means of a probing amendment. How far is a local authority going to be obliged to do it? It is not clear how they will find out if employers are not allowing access to training and education when they should be. Do we have to rely on the Connexions tracking service? Who will tell it when employers are not fulfilling their part? What happens if the employer ignores the penalty notice? Is the local authority required to take it to court? This clause raises real problems for local authorities. By and large, they are anxious to encourage and help small and medium-sized businesses in their area, yet imposing a penalty on them for not doing what they are supposed to under the Bill could sour relations between local authorities and small and medium-sized businesses. I understand that ““may”” means that the local authority has discretion. In particular, we have been talking about the impositions on small and medium-sized businesses, some of which may not realise the requirements. Perhaps in the first place it is a question of guidance. We need a bit more clarity about precisely who will do the tracking, who will tell small and medium-sized businesses that they are not doing their job and who will provide the information to local authorities. How far do local authorities have to pursue this? Clause 22(1) states, "““the authority may by notice … require the employer to pay a financial penalty””." Do they have to chase them up on that? Somewhat similar issues arise over Amendment No. 116A, which is to Clause 25. Clause 25(2) states: "““The employer must, so far as is reasonable having regard to the matters mentioned in subsection (3), permit the person to participate in training or education in accordance with those appropriate arrangements””." Clause 25(3) states: "““Those matters are … the needs of the person in order to fulfil the duty imposed by section 2””—" that is, the duty to participate in education or training— "““the circumstances of the employer’s business … the effect of the person’s absence from work on the running of that business””." Subsections (2) and (3) appear to give employers loopholes. They seem to imply that, in those circumstances, it is not reasonable if an employee spending one or two days a week on a training course is really going to inconvenience the employer. We need to be very clear on whether the employer has a duty. If those are circumstances where the employer does not have a duty, who adjudicates? How far does that affect local authorities’ duties under Clause 22 to impose a penalty? There are also implications in Clause 27, which would be amended by Amendment No. 116B. We need much greater clarity for employers and local authorities as to how that should be evidenced to the local authority and what sort of adjudication process there should be if the employer calls into play the let-outs in Clause 25. Local authorities need to be able to ensure cross-border transfer of data. Given that the young person’s place of employment may well be in another host authority, whose responsibility is it? This reiterates all the data and logistics arguments that we have had on other clauses. I would be grateful if the Minister could provide more clarification on these parts of the Bill. I beg to move.