Debates between Lord Trefgarne and Lord Hill of Oareford during the 2010-2015 Parliament

Education: Engineering

Debate between Lord Trefgarne and Lord Hill of Oareford
Thursday 15th March 2012

(12 years, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Trefgarne Portrait Lord Trefgarne
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. I need to declare an interest: I am the former chairman of SEMTA, previously the Engineering Training Authority.

Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, reforms to school performance tables are intended to raise the status of qualifications and not downgrade them. We want a simpler system where qualifications have an equal value and are selected because of their benefit to pupils, rather than their league-table weighting. We are encouraging engineering employers to work with awarding organisations to develop successor qualifications to the diploma. Engineering is extremely important for the future of the British economy. That, of course, is one reason why we are expanding university technical colleges and engineering apprenticeships.

Lord Trefgarne Portrait Lord Trefgarne
- Hansard - -

My Lords, while I understand the arguments put by my noble friend, is he aware that the proposition on the engineering diploma has received the condemnation of providers, regulators and employers alike, and now of the Business Secretary himself? Will the noble Lord therefore please reconsider?

Lord Hill of Oareford Portrait Lord Hill of Oareford
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am aware that this matter has given rise to some strong opinions among those who are committed to the engineering industry. I am afraid that I am not able to give the noble Lord the commitment that he would like, because the overriding objective of trying to simplify the qualifications is to have a consistent approach across different subjects and areas, and the benefit that we think we will derive from simplification is worth striving for. I recognise that there are strong concerns. I am glad that engineering employers are talking to the awarding organisations that want to carry on offering the principal learning element of the engineering diploma, and I hope that that will continue. I urge the noble Lord, with his experience, to help us in those conversations.