Debates between Damian Hinds and Daniel Zeichner during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Post-18 Education and Funding

Debate between Damian Hinds and Daniel Zeichner
Tuesday 4th June 2019

(5 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Damian Hinds Portrait Damian Hinds
- Hansard - -

I believe that Ministers used often to stand at this Dispatch Box and say, “I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave a few moments ago,” but the Gentleman has just been good enough to repeat it so I do not have to. All these things—the various terms of repayment, the level of the fee, the T-grant top-up and so on—are interrelated; of course they have to be considered in the round and we will do so when we come back with our response.

Daniel Zeichner Portrait Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

There is much to welcome in this review, not least the proposals to tackle the neglect of those who do not go to university, but the universities are right to worry about the proposals for differential funding for different courses, which the Secretary of State appeared to speak quite warmly of a few moments ago. Universities are different; they are not all the same—they have different strengths and different roles—and they are best placed to determine how to allocate resources, so can the Secretary of State reassure us that he respects and understands university autonomy?

Damian Hinds Portrait Damian Hinds
- Hansard - -

I not only respect and understand but celebrate university autonomy. I think the hon. Gentleman represents a university city so I am slightly surprised at his question, because of course different subjects attract different amounts of money right now, and quite markedly different amounts of money. For example, a great deal more teaching grant goes into medicine than other subjects. The independent panel review report suggests there should be a different balance in the cap on overall fees and therefore how much variability there would be in the T-grant, but it is not introducing that principle for the first time.

Schools That Work For Everyone

Debate between Damian Hinds and Daniel Zeichner
Monday 14th May 2018

(6 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.

Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Damian Hinds Portrait Damian Hinds
- Hansard - -

Indeed I can. We owe particular attention and focus to looked-after children, and we have been discussing specifically with the Independent Schools Council what more we can do to help that cohort.

Daniel Zeichner Portrait Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This morning three excellent primary schools in my area, including The Spinney and Mayfield Primary School, announced that, after two years’ work, they are pulling out of their plan to form a multi-academy trust because

“the recent change in education policy now makes the current educational climate too ambiguous for us to proceed”.

I am pleased that they are staying with the local authority, but does the Secretary of State really believe that ambiguity is a good way to run our school system?

Damian Hinds Portrait Damian Hinds
- Hansard - -

I suppose that for us here in the House, managing politics, ambiguity is a daily feature. I think that converting to academy status, becoming part of an academy trust and having the opportunity to share good practice and learning across schools is a very positive action. Many thousands of schools have benefited from it, and I want more of them to make that positive choice. However, individual schools may have different criteria.