Schools: Financial Education

Lord Lee of Trafford Excerpts

Tuesday 12th July 2022 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

The noble Lord will be aware that the Government made a commitment to make no changes to the national curriculum during the life of this Parliament, and that remains the case. Although citizenship is not compulsory in primary schools, as we know, many schools choose to teach it as part of their commitment to delivering a broad and balanced curriculum. The Money and Pensions Service has clear goals to ensure that 2 million more children and young people get meaningful financial education by 2030 and we are very supportive of its work in that.

[Lord Lee of Trafford (LD)]

How is the financial education of young people helped by prohibiting grand- parents taking out junior ISAs for their grandchildren?

[Baroness Barran (Con)]

I was not aware of the point the noble Lord raises. More broadly, when you talk to young people, they say that a lot of their financial education comes from their parents and family, including their grandparents, so I agree with the sentiment that grandparents have an important role to play.

Queen’s Speech

Lord Lee of Trafford Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd June 2015 Lords Chamber

[Lord Lee of Trafford (LD)]

My Lords, I was delighted that the Minister referred to tourism and heritage in his opening contribution, because for many years, through successive Governments, tourism has been regarded as a Cinderella industry. In the 2010 election none of the major parties mentioned tourism at all in their manifestos. However, tourism is the number one industry in more parliamentary constituencies than any other single industry. It represents about 9% of GDP, and a third of the new jobs created between 2010 and 2013 have been in tourism—the gracious Speech talks very much about the importance of creating jobs.

I declare an interest as chairman of the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions. A number of us came together, determined that the 2015 manifestos of all parties would mention tourism. We lobbied, held a series of meetings, and I am glad to say that that came to pass: all the parties mentioned tourism in their manifestos. However, the majority of the commitments that were given were fairly bland and were very much of a generalised nature. The Conservatives, for example, said:

“We will set challenging targets for Visit Britain and Visit England to ensure more visitors travel outside the capital”,

and:

“We will invest to boost tourism in the South West”.

Perhaps the noble Lord in his reply might give an indication of just what that means. It goes on:

“We will make it easier to access our beautiful landscapes, by providing free, comprehensive maps of all open-access green space”.

Once again, perhaps the noble Lord might tell us where those maps are—I am sure we are eagerly awaiting them.

The Labour Party talked of creating,

“a Prime Minister’s Committee on the Arts, Culture and Creative Industries, with a membership drawn from all sectors and regions. The Committee will bring issues of concern direct to the attention of the Prime Minister”.

Well, we have all been spared that, thankfully.

I am sorry to say that my own party’s commitment to tourism was equally disappointing:

“We will work to make sure the British tourism industry is able to compete with other major world destinations and be a key generator of growth in the UK economy”,

and:

“Give higher status to tourism within the Department for Culture, Media and Sport”.

I must say that a number of the minor parties were more specific.

However, perhaps of greater importance were the conclusions and recommendations of the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, which reported in March. It drew attention to a number of problems: the mistake in abolishing the RDAs without putting in place adequate arrangements for tourism promotion; the disparity in funding between VisitEngland’s funding compared with VisitScotland and Visit Wales; and that too many regulations are ill-fitted to the world of small businesses that characterise much of the tourist industry.

The Select Committee report made a number of recommendations, virtually all of which have strong industry support. It said that funding for the GREAT campaign should continue for a longer period, to give certainty to the industry, and that the Government should,

“make the cost of UK visas competitive, for example by moving towards the issue to bona fide tourists of more multiple entry, long term visas”.

It urged that the Government should,

“respond quickly and decisively to the Howard Davies review”,

once it reports, and recommended that the Government analyse the impact of air passenger duty on the United Kingdom’s tourism industry and monitor developments in Scotland and Wales closely for any impact on England. The Select Committee wants the merits of the claims of the Cut Tourism VAT campaign to be thoroughly assessed, and a vigorous cost-benefit analysis of daylight saving time. The Tourism Alliance calculates that double summer time could generate between £2.5 billion and £3.5 billion of additional revenue and some 60,000 to 80,000 new jobs.

The report concludes:

“We believe tourism should have a more visible profile in, and be more vigorously promoted by, its sponsoring Department”.

I believe that tourism should immediately be brought into the title of the DCMS—nothing would send a clearer message of support to the industry. Two members of the Select Committee are of course now in ministerial office at the DCMS: Tracey Crouch, who has ministerial responsibility for tourism, and John Whittingdale. Importantly, John Whittingdale, who chaired the committee, is now Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, so he has a great opportunity to deliver on many of his own recommendations. As an industry, we wish him every success.