Education Maintenance Allowance

Frank Dobson Excerpts

Wednesday 19th January 2011 Commons Chamber

[Frank Dobson (Holborn and St Pancras) (Lab)]

I take personally this proposal to abolish the education maintenance allowance, because I can remember being utterly skint between the ages of 16 and 19, as my dad died at about the time that I was doing my O-levels. My mother was determined that I should stay on at school, so she went out to work again, but my situation was also eased by a small grant that I received from the then East Riding county council, which, I have to say in fairness, was Tory-controlled.

That small grant made a huge difference to me. The few extra bob that I received meant that, as a sixth-former, I could play a normal part in sixth-form activities, and I did not feel left out or as much of a burden on my mother as I might have felt. I am sure that the same applies to many young people who receive EMA now, because they are simply able to play a full part in growing up and going to college.

Some people seem to think that EMA is a social payment, but it is not. If a student does English literature, they will probably want to go to the theatre, but they have to pay to do so. If they do music they might want to buy—or these days, rent—an instrument, or go to a concert. That is a vital part of education, and EMA rightly makes its contribution. If a student studies civil engineering, they might want to go on a visit to see some great tunnelling equipment somewhere, but they have to pay. The EMA makes a contribution to such things, and students are able to function like everybody else; they are not regarded as poor relations.

Young people do not want to be a burden on their parent or parents, or on their sisters and brothers; and they do not want to diminish their family’s status by reducing them to poverty after taking too much money in order to continue going to college. We have about 1,750 such young people in my constituency. Many go to Camden’s excellent schools, but quite a lot do NVQs and other vocational courses at King’s Cross construction skills centre, the Working Men’s college, Camden Jobtrain—where literally 100% of young people receive EMA—and Camden Itec. All those young people work hard to better themselves—the sort of thing that Mrs Thatcher used to go on about endlessly. They are doing exactly what she would have wanted and are the epitome of aspiration, so to end EMA for such people is to kick them in the teeth. It will leave them with a stark contrast. They are being kicked in the teeth, but they see billionaire bankers and tax avoiders and hear millionaire Cabinet Ministers prating on about them being a dead-weight—a dead-weight.

There is a real danger, not just for the Tories and the Liberal Democrats but for our whole society, that we will turn those young people from aspiration to alienation, which will be very damaging. So, we are not just concerned about the people who might drop out, although that would be bad. We should also be concerned because if we get rid of EMA we will impoverish not just those young people who manage to stay on despite its disappearance, but many of their families at the same time. The Government and the people supporting them should be ashamed of themselves.