Paul Blomfield (Sheffield Central) (Lab) I beg to move, That this
House has considered the impact of increases in the cost of living
on further and higher education students. I am delighted to see you
in the Chair, Sir George. This is a timely debate coming as the new
academic year starts. It is based on the two-stage inquiry
undertaken during the first half of the year by the all-party
parliamentary group for students, which I chair and officers of
which are also...Request free trial
(Sheffield Central)
(Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the impact of increases in the
cost of living on further and higher education students.
I am delighted to see you in the Chair, Sir George. This is a
timely debate coming as the new academic year starts. It is based
on the two-stage inquiry undertaken during the first half of the
year by the all-party parliamentary group for students, which I
chair and officers of which are also present. We looked at the
impact of the cost of living crisis on higher education students,
on which we reported in March, and, in partnership with the
all-party parliamentary group on further education and lifelong
learning—whose chair, the hon. Member for Waveney (), I welcome —on FE students,
on which we reported in July.
Although many others have been impacted hard by the cost of
living crisis, we were concerned that students should not be
overlooked. We were not alone in that concern. Petitions
Committee staff wrote to me last week to tell me that there have
been six petitions to Parliament seeking support for students. It
is important that students are not seen as a homogeneous group.
In FE and HE, there is enormous diversity of students, including
part-time and full-time; distance learners and commuter students;
many with families and caring responsibilities, juggling work
with study; classroom-based and apprentices; undergraduates and
postgraduates; and home and international. Of course, there is
the difference in the arrangements and responses across the four
nations of the UK.
The current student cohort, though, have one thing in common: the
double misfortune of educational disruption from covid and now
the cost of living crisis. Our inquiry collated evidence from
universities and student unions, and directly from hundreds of
students who engaged with us. We drew on the work of others,
including the Office for National Statistics, the Sutton Trust,
the Institute for Fiscal Studies and Save the Student. I would
like to thank Parliament’s Chamber Engagement Team for its work
in gathering feedback since the debate was announced. Just over
the past couple of days, we have had upwards of 160 students,
parents and others contact us.
So what did we hear? First, we heard that the student support
system has failed to keep up with rising costs and that it was
already unfit for purpose when the cost of living crisis hit,
particularly given the decreasing value of student loans.
According to the Save the Student survey, the loan fell short of
average costs that students face by £439 per month in 2021-22,
and that had increased to a shortfall of £582 per month last
year. Other factors include the freezing of the lower parental
earnings threshold, which means that the proportion studying
outside London who receive the maximum student loan fell from 57%
in 2012-13 to 38% in 2021-22.
(Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)
My constituent Elliot is starting his final year at university,
and his biggest worry is securing affordable housing. The maximum
loan he gets is not keeping up with the prices, and he spends at
least two thirds of his loan on rent alone. His family cannot
afford to top up his rent. Does my hon. Friend agree that dealing
with such financial hardships can be a barrier to excelling at
university and that much more financial support is needed to give
students the freedom to focus on their education?
I echo the point my hon. Friend makes. Many of the comments that
we received reflect the sorts of problems that his constituent
faces, and I will come on to some of the wider points that he
made.
Another contributory factor, according to the IFS, was the
inflation forecast errors used to calculate loan increases, which
mean that their real value is lower now than at any time in the
past seven years. On top of that, we have had the scrapping of
maintenance grants. The cumulative effect has pushed many
students to a tipping point. More than a quarter of students were
left with less than £50 a month, after paying rent and bills last
year. As my hon. Friend points out, rent is accelerating at a
significant rate. Our inquiry found 96% facing financial
difficulty, with food, rent and energy the biggest pressures, but
transport costs were also a key issue and particularly difficult
for commuter students, many of whom chose to be home-based
precisely to save money. Students have been struggling to get to
their classes, access libraries and travel to placements.
The inquiry was a genuine learning exercise for us and we were
particularly concerned to hear about the sharp increase in hours
of paid employment taken by students. Of our respondents, 61%
worked alongside their studies and 37% said that they are working
more hours because of cost of living pressures. The Sutton Trust
reported that about half of undergraduates missed classes last
year due to paid employment. Around a quarter missed a deadline
or asked for an extension on a piece of work.
They are often in precarious and insecure jobs. Joanna, one of
the respondents to the Chamber Engagement Team survey, said,
“I have had to take several jobs, as the part time job sector is
full of zero hours contracts with little stability and no promise
of actual work. I am working more than I should have to and my
grades are suffering.”
(Brighton, Pavilion)
(Green)
I congratulate the hon. Member on securing this debate. Some of
the figures he has given are truly shocking. Does he share my
shock that a quarter of universities are now running food banks?
The fact that universities are themselves having to provide food
banks for students is an indictment of the fact that clearly our
young people cannot afford to make ends meet at university. Does
he agree we should consider bringing back things such as the
maintenance grant so that our young people can focus on learning
rather than spend all this time trying to make ends meet?
I thank the hon. Member for her intervention and her support as
an officer of the all-party parliamentary group. She is right
about the shocking fact she shared about food banks. I will come
to that and reflect on some of the recommendations she talks
about.
As well as affecting academic work, paid employment also affects
involvement in extracurricular activities. People might ask why
that matters so much, but it matters enormously because
volunteering roles involve networking, team working, leadership
skills and wider opportunities. Those experiences give graduates
that extra edge in the job market.
Hitting grades, weakening skills development and limiting
CVs—this all means that those from poorer backgrounds, who are
the ones relying on ever increasing paid employment, are
particularly disadvantaged, reversing the efforts of successive
Governments to widen opportunities and ensure that those who take
advantage of higher education go on to succeed. Since our
inquiry, we are beginning to see the impact on retention, with
rising drop-out rates. The sector group, MillionPlus, has
estimated that as many as 90,000 to 108,000 students might find
it too difficult financially to continue to study.
Responding to all of those challenges, most universities have put
more money into hardship funds. Others have developed initiatives
to offset the pressures faced by students, though not uniformly.
The sector probably could do more. Just last week, the Higher
Education Policy Institute published a report saying that those
initiatives included supporting students with food costs,
providing both means-tested and unconditional hardship funding,
and subsidising student activities. And, as the hon. Member for
Brighton, Pavilion () pointed out, a quarter now
have food banks on campus.
University support services have substantially increased their
workload, extending the criteria for hardship funds, drawing in
more eligibility, and working with their student unions. Our
survey found that many students have not always accessed the
funds available, either because they were not aware of them,
which is a challenge for the sector, or because they did not
think they qualified for additional help.
Recently, we have seen some universities moving to a three-day
week in their timetabling on some academic programmes, to allow
students to fit in their part-time jobs alongside study and to
limit the impact of commuting costs. That may offer immediate
relief, but it is not a solution.
There are other ways in which financial pressures are affecting
life chances. Many students aiming for master’s programmes, which
have become important as an additional benefit in the job market,
said they were reconsidering. For example, Alex, who also
responded through the Chamber Engagement Team, said:
“as a working-class student in my penultimate year, I see my
peers consider postgraduate study and I wonder how they can
afford it. I’ll never be able to save enough”.
Postgraduate research students told us that they, too, were
struggling—that stipend payments are insufficient to meet living
costs and that PGRs are ineligible for childcare grants as they
are in education: they often cannot access hardship funds because
they fall into the gap between the definition of being a member
of staff and that of being a student.
There are issues to address across the board. Our evidence
confirmed a disproportionate impact on already marginalised and
underrepresented groups, disabled students, black and minority
ethnic students, care leavers and students who are estranged from
their families. The Sutton Trust found that students from lower
socioeconomic backgrounds were more affected, with a third
skipping meals to save costs. It also found that a fifth, mainly
from disadvantaged backgrounds, plan to live at home as commuter
students during term time to reduce costs. That might be okay for
some. It might work in London, where there is a wide range of
higher educational choices. However, it limits university choice
and limits course choice for many students across the rest of the
country.
Our inquiry made four key recommendations to Government for
higher education. First, to provide further hardship funding to
universities to enable them to support those most in need.
Secondly, to increase student maintenance loans to restore their
real value and to maintain that value by taking a similar
approach to uprating benefits. Thirdly, to consider reintroducing
maintenance grants, as was recommended by the review the
Government commissioned from Sir Philip Augar. Fourthly, to
increase the household income threshold for the maximum student
loan, which has been frozen since 2008. At that point, the
threshold was in line with average earnings of £25,000, but those
average earnings are now £33,000.
I move on to our further education inquiry. I am sure the chair
of the all-party parliamentary group on further education and
lifelong learning, the hon. Member for Waveney, who is present,
will cover many of the specific points, so I will skim over them
a little more lightly. Our evidence found that, although FE
students face similar financial pressures, many face additional
ones, supporting not just themselves but in many cases having to
support their families. FE students who responded to our survey
reported difficulties with transport in particular and 72% said
they face costs that put them in financial difficulty. Like HE
students, they were working more paid hours to make ends meet,
struggling to prioritise their coursework and classes and facing
negative impacts on mental health.
Retention was also a key issue for colleges, with a decline in
student attendance taking up resources to ensure students do not
drop out of their studies. That is not just a problem for the
colleges. Many students in FE are on technical and vocational
courses—I know that is an issue close to the Minister’s
heart—providing essential skills for the UK workforce. The
Association of Colleges reported to us that bursaries and
hardship funds are becoming an essential item for family budgets.
It is a bit like the point about food banks. Some reported
students walking several miles a day to college so they could use
their transport bursary to support their family with food and
energy costs.
FE does not have the funding of HE and colleges cannot provide
the same support. Of serious concern to us were emerging reports
that colleges have been dealing with a significant rise in family
tensions and domestic abuse because of cost of living pressures
and have been referring more students to supported housing.
Shockingly, some colleges told us about increased safeguarding
issues, with cash-strapped students vulnerable to criminal and
sexual exploitation.
Concerns were also raised about apprentices, with an average wage
of £5.28 an hour, not being eligible for the 16-to-19 bursary
because of Government rules—apprentices often travel furthest to
placements, attend more regularly and are left more exposed to
travel costs. We subsequently heard about the particular issue
facing young carers doing T-levels, who will lose their carer’s
allowance if they study for more than 21 hours a week. So the
cost of living crisis is affecting decisions not only about
whether to remain in further education, but about the type of
course, with many leaning towards shorter courses or those that
lead more quickly to securing work, sacrificing ambition and
limiting their potential.
Our key inquiry recommendations to the Government for FE included
providing additional funding support so that providers can
increase bursaries targeted at those most in need; reviewing the
mandated eligibility criteria for bursary funds—this is an easy
one as it does not cost anything—to provide colleges with more
flexibility to determine eligibility; considering the case for
extending free school meal eligibility so that colleges can
provide more subsistence support; considering the introduction of
free or subsidised travel for all 16 to 19-year-olds in FE or
training; and increasing the apprenticeship minimum wage,
including enabling providers to use bursary funds to support
apprentices as well as other FE students.
My final point is that, in FE and in HE, the key takeaway from
our inquiry has been the particular impact on students from
poorer backgrounds. We are seeing the cost of living crisis
damaging access and participation, limiting opportunities,
affecting lives, levelling down not up, widening the skills gap
and weakening our research capacity as a country. I hope that the
Minister, and indeed the shadow Minister, will give full
consideration to our recommendations.
Several hon. Members rose—
(in the Chair)
Order. In view of the number of people hoping to speak in the
debate, I am afraid I must impose a time limit of three minutes
on Back-Bench speeches. I am sorry, but otherwise the number of
people able to take part would be even more limited.
4.47pm
(Waveney) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir George. I
congratulate the hon. Member for Sheffield Central () on securing this debate and
opening it in such a comprehensive and diligent way. As he said,
I chair the APPG for further education and lifelong learning, and
I would like to thank the Association of Colleges, which provides
our secretariat, for all the work it did in supporting the second
stage of the inquiry, focusing on the challenges faced by further
education students.
An online evidence session was held, during which we heard
harrowing feedback from FE students about the experiences they
are facing. Many of those in further education come from less
well-off backgrounds and are already making enormous sacrifices
to go to college. They are working long hours in part-time jobs,
and many are supporting members of their wider family. The cost
of living crisis has piled further pressure on them; for some,
the burden has become intolerable and they have had no choice but
to give up their studies.
Colleges are provided with funding to support students, but this
is inadequate, and in many respects the crisis is deepening. East
Coast College, with campuses in Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth, has
been providing bursaries and free school meals. Two years ago, it
was supporting 1,400 16 to 18-year-olds. Last year the number
rose to 1,842, and this year the college has already received
2,200 applications, which represents two thirds of its student
cohort. The situation is intolerable, and the negative knock-on
effects are far-reaching. Many people are being placed under
intolerable pressure and are making enormous sacrifices. Colleges
themselves find their budgets stretched to breaking point, and
that in turn leads to the ever-widening skills gap that affects
our economic performance so dramatically.
As we have heard, the July report put forward six
recommendations. I would like to highlight one that we speak
about a great deal in FE debates: the need for additional core
revenue funding for the sector. I acknowledge that in recent
years, particularly with regard to capital funding, the situation
has improved, but FE gets a raw deal. I urge the Chancellor to
address that at the forthcoming autumn statement by providing
£400 million additional revenue funding that can address the
problems that the sector faces and also alleviate the particular
challenge that FE students face.
4.50pm
(Newcastle upon Tyne East)
(Ind)
It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Waveney (); I profoundly agree with the
last point that he made. It is an even greater pleasure, Sir
George, to serve under your chairmanship and to be able to
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central
() on securing the debate and
also on the work done by the all-party parliamentary group for
students, which provides material to underpin the debate
today.
My own constituency in Newcastle upon Tyne East has a very large
student population. Perhaps we are more famous for shipbuilding,
heavy engineering and manufacturing cigarettes—all industries
that have gone—but we are still famous for having a large student
population.
Inflation is an evil that must be exterminated. Mrs Thatcher told
us that in 1987 and it made its way into the Conservative
manifesto. She might have added that once exterminated, it ought
to stay exterminated. For reasons we all understand, it has
broken out again and makes us face a series of challenges—some
much more easily borne by the rich than by the poor. That is the
core point that I want to make in my short address to this
debate.
A number of funding authorities have had to address this
question. In Northern Ireland, the maximum maintenance awards
have been increased by 40%. In Wales the increase is 9.4% and in
Scotland, although the support is provided in a different
formula, it is a rise of £900 a year, which, depending on
circumstances, is an increase between 11.1% and 17.6%. That is
the devolved Administrations.
Maintenance loans in England are due to rise, as my hon. Friend
the Member for Sheffield Central told us, by just 2.8%. That
cannot possibly meet the general challenges of inflation. When we
look at the factors that make up the specific pressures on
students, such as rent increases, the cost of food, which has
been particularly affected by the arable sector price increases,
and transport costs as well, we see that students are
disproportionately affected. Yet their interests have not been
addressed, so they find themselves working longer hours to earn
more money to keep themselves and become subject to an enormous
amount of stress and anxiety. That could be a separate debate in
itself.
4.53pm
(Worcester) (Con)
It is a pleasure to speak in this debate, Sir George; I
congratulate the hon. Member for Sheffield Central () on securing it. He and I
have worked together over many years. His careful stewardship of
the APPG inquiries is typical of his attention to detail and his
passion—shared, I know, by the Minister, my right hon. Friend the
Member for Harlow ()—for education as an engine
for social mobility.
I was very pleased, both as Chair of the Education Committee and
as a local MP with a large university and many excellent colleges
in my patch, to be able to serve on the inquiry and contribute to
it. There are a number of strong recommendations, which I want to
endorse, including more targeted bursary funding and an increase
in the earnings threshold for the first time since 2018. I hope
my right hon. Friend on the Front Bench will be able take some of
those up.
The two reports from the all-party group highlight several
concerning trends for students, which look set to fundamentally
alter how young people see the comparative value of different
further and higher education routes. Where that increases the
attractiveness of earn-while-you-learn approaches such as
apprenticeships, it might in some senses be welcome, but where it
reduces students’ ability to complete their courses or
participate in the wider life of universities, including clubs,
volunteering and community engagement, and where it risks
increasing drop-out rates or requires students to spend so much
time working that their studies and mental health suffer, it is a
concern.
Local students at the University of Worcester wrote to me with a
number of concerns that they wanted to be raised in this debate.
They point out that the cost of living is acutely affecting those
who live on their maintenance loans and feel that a number of the
existing schemes to support people with the cost of living
specifically exclude students. They say that student
accommodation costs have risen 60% in our area in the last
decade, and 68% of students who responded to their survey say
that they can no longer afford course materials. One third of
students have considered dropping out because of finances, and
one third—compared with the quarter highlighted in the all-party
group’s report—have been left at the end of the month with less
than £50 after rent and bills. They call for an increased student
finance package and tailored cost of living support for students.
In that respect, the recommendations of the all-party group are
very welcome.
The Education Committee has also heard concerns that students
taking T-levels find that they cannot complete their courses
because of cost of living pressures on their families; in many
cases, they are transferring to apprenticeships to earn while
they learn. I highlight the recommendation, which echoes the
point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Waveney (), about FE funding in our
report “The future of post-16 qualifications”; I gently say to my
right hon. Friend the Minister that the figure cited in the
Government’s response—that there is an increase of 2.2% for the
FE sector—is clearly not enough. I know that he will want to make
the case to the Treasury for more, and I hope that he will use
the reports from the all-party group to strengthen that case.
I also highlight very briefly the Select Committee’s
recommendation on allowing students and people in study to access
the 30 hours of childcare. We think that that is an important
part of the offer; it would ensure that people with parenting and
caring responsibilities do not drop out of education and out of
the opportunity to increase their earnings potential through
upskilling.
I am grateful for the opportunity to have spoken.
4.57pm
(Liverpool, West Derby)
(Lab)
It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir George. I
thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central () for securing this important
debate.
Further and higher education students in my constituency of
Liverpool, West Derby and across the country are facing immense
pressure from the cost of living crisis, with rising bills,
inflation and the Government’s real-term cuts to students’
maintenance loans. The maintenance loan simply does not allow
students to cover basic costs or to live and study in dignity.
The National Union of Students reports that more than a quarter
of higher education students are left with less than £50 a month
after covering rent and bills, and that 42% are surviving on less
than £100. The impact on students’ health, wellbeing and
education is devastating. Some 22% of surveyed students say that
they often skip meals to save money, and, shamefully, a quarter
of universities now have food banks.
A staggering 90% of students say that the rising cost of living
is negatively impacting their mental health. Students are the
very future of our country, and they are being driven into
poverty simply for wanting to go to college and university to
study. Surely higher education should be seen as a right
accessible to all who want to go—an investment in a public good
that is essential to the future success of this nation.
At a recent talk in Parliament with a superb class of sixth-form
students from St John Bosco, in West Derby, about their plans for
the future, it absolutely broke my heart to hear that many of the
students felt that higher education was simply not an option for
them because of the cost involved. I often hear talk about glass
ceilings in politics; listening to the class that day reinforced
my view that the cost of higher education for the working class
was now becoming one of the biggest glass ceilings of all.
For over a decade in power, the Government have completely failed
to support students in Liverpool, West Derby and right across the
country. The coalition Government scrapped the education
maintenance allowance, and the bursary fund that replaced it has
less than a third of the EMA’s budget and stricter eligibility
criteria that have excluded many who desperately need that
support. That simply cannot go on. We need systemic change. We
need an end to the underfunding of our entire education system,
an end to under-investment in students and an end to the failed
free market experiment in higher education.
The Minister has an opportunity in the upcoming King’s Speech to
introduce legislation to support students and transform our
education system. I call on him to listen to the NUS and
“urgently and dramatically increase the level of maintenance
support”.
I also call on him to listen to the APPG’s recommendations, which
were outlined by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central.
Finally, I ask him to listen to students in West Derby who are
calling for tuition fees to be abolished and for a system of
non-repayable financial support to be put in place so that they
are not excluded from accessing higher education. Students and
their families in West Derby deserve nothing less.
5.00pm
(Strangford) (DUP)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Sheffield Central () on setting the scene. A
term used often in this Chamber applies to him: he is truly a
champion of education, particularly further education, and he has
shown us his knowledge today.
I have spoken countless times in Westminster Hall and the main
Chamber about how the cost of living is impacting people from all
walks of life, and we must have sympathy for students in further
and higher education. None of us is a stranger to how
extortionately expensive it is to attend universities and
colleges nowadays, and I have no doubt whatever that the cost of
living crisis has added to that significantly. Back in March,
when the impact of the crisis was still at its peak, we took many
steps to ensure that students across the UK were supported. In
some areas, rents were frozen and public transport for students
was altered. Inflation in the UK had been running at more than
10% since the start of the last term, and students are still
feeling the impact.
Some constituents have contacted me to ask, “What is the point in
going to university?” When students and young people say that, we
have to realise just how important it is to address this issue.
Fees and the costs of books, accommodation and transport are not
doable for some families. One of my staff members used to travel
to university on a return train ticket, which cost £10.50 when
she attended between 2018 and 2021. The same ticket today is
£16.50. Students must travel at least three or four times a week,
so that is £50 a week, or £200 a month, for a student to attend
their place of education. Some students are attending university
three or four days a week and working full time as well, and they
are just about making ends meet. As the darker and colder weather
approaches, many fear that circumstances will arise whereby they
simply cannot afford to continue. That means dropping out, which
is even worse. Many are already having to resort to asking their
parents for help or seeking emergency loans.
I ask the Minister, who is a good Minister—as he knows, everyone
in the House respects him, which is important to put on the
record—to speak to Student Finance Northern Ireland about
maintenance grants in Northern Ireland. The price of fuel,
electricity, rent and food has gone up, but Student Finance NI
does not deem it necessary to increase maintenance grants
accordingly. The hon. Member for Sheffield Central referred to
some of the costs that have risen.
We often talk about how young people are the future and how we
build the environment we live in today to encourage them. The
fact is that they feel beaten before they have started, with
excessive, debilitating bills coming from every direction and
hitting them head on from all sides. More needs to be done. We
are all making the same request as we approach this winter, to
ensure that our further and higher education system across the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is
sustainable and workable for all. Let us do something for our
students, and let us do it today.
5.03pm
(Cambridge) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir George, and
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central
(). He said almost exactly
what I would have said, but I would not have put it so well.
Colleagues of different parties have made similar points, so I
will try not to repeat them.
I find myself returning to the point made by the Institute for
Fiscal Studies that the value of maintenance loans for students
from the poorest families is at its lowest in real terms since
2016-17, and the poorest students in England are more than £1,000
worse off than in 2021-22. Like the hon. Member for Strangford
(), I respect the Minister, but he has to explain how
the Government have allowed this situation to develop, because
there has been a paltry rise in the maintenance loan. I am sure
he is embarrassed about it. He ought to be embarrassed about it
on behalf of the Government, and they need to do something about
it.
I will make a few quick points about the city of Cambridge, which
I represent. Cambridge is a genuine education city, with fine
universities, an excellent further education college and
brilliant sixth-form colleges. But as the Cambridge University
Students Union points out, although the University of Cambridge
is a very wealthy university—perhaps the wealthiest in
Europe—sadly Cambridge is also the UK’s most unequal city on some
measures. In CUSU’s words:
“Students must pay extortionate rents, College bills and other
hidden costs, while maintenance loans and University and College
bursaries have been largely stagnant. Disparity across the
collegiate University means that students’ experiences of both
applying for and receiving necessary funding differ vastly.”
There are many different experiences, but the fact that one of
the Cambridge colleges has had to set up a food hub speaks
volumes about the situation in which we find ourselves.
I am grateful to Harvey Brown, the CUSU welfare and community
officer, for pointing out the pressure on postgraduate students
in particular. He said that some had been in touch to say that
there is simply nowhere they can afford to live in Cambridge,
with some suggesting that living in a tent was the only means of
staying in the city to finish their studies. He also talked about
postgrad and international students, who are reliant on
scholarships and often depend on extortionate visas, and the visa
criteria for international students being harsh, with some having
to prove progression to maintain their visa.
There is a range of complicated issues here, but clearly
something needs to be done to improve the situation. I also echo
the points about further education students. I was told this
morning that some are paying £2,000 a year in rail fares just to
come to and from Ely for their education.
I will conclude by observing that there is quite a furore in the
papers about the triple lock. Is it not extraordinary that there
is not a furore about this generation, which is actually
suffering here and now? Would it not be wonderful to see that on
the front pages of the newspapers tomorrow?
5.06pm
(Leeds North West)
(Lab/Co-op)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central
(), who chairs the APPG for
students, on securing this debate. As a vice-chair of the APPG, I
am pleased to be able to speak.
I am lucky enough to represent the Leeds North West constituency,
which has one of the biggest student populations in the country.
Our universities and their students boost Leeds’s culture and
economy, and provide lifelong homes for people like me who never
quite manage to leave. I have heard from students in my
constituency that they are taking more and more hours of work in
attempts to cover their basic costs. It is not surprising that
research shows that 49% of students have missed lectures or
seminars, which they themselves are paying for, to undertake paid
work. A quarter of students report that they are less likely to
finish their degree as a direct result of the cost of living
crisis. Even after receiving maintenance loans and bursaries,
students in Leeds North West, and up and down the country, are
unable to pay their rent and are at risk of homelessness.
The main universities and their student union executives in
Leeds, and I am sure across the country, are doing outstanding
work to support students. Leeds Beckett University has gone above
and beyond with measures such as absorbing 80% of the increase in
rental costs for those living in student halls, providing a hot
meal for £2 every lunchtime for every student, and doubling the
allocation of its student hardship fund to £3 million. Similarly,
great work is being done by the executive officers at Leeds
University Union, such as paying for additional course materials,
tackling period poverty on campus and developing a basic needs
hub for students. Last year, LUU offered 200 free breakfasts all
the way through December, as well as a free night bus service. It
is also campaigning for a real living wage for student staff.
According to the NUS, 92% of students state that the cost of
living crisis has had an impact on their mental health, with 31%
categorising that impact as major. We have a situation on our
hands that has been worsening for a decade and is now impossible
for the Government to ignore. We already know that black
students, students with disabilities and students from areas with
high levels of deprivation are more likely to drop out of
university and less likely to obtain a first-class degree. Trans
and non-binary students, as well as students of colour, are more
likely to have an income of less than £500 a month. By failing to
protect them, this Government are devaluing the education of all
students who do not have the luxury of generational wealth.
The Tories have consistently degraded the worth of higher
education. We saw it when they tripled university tuition fees,
we saw it when they introduced cuts to education and anti-strike
laws, and we are seeing it now as they leave students at the
mercy of food banks and help from their university, student union
or even other students. The fact is that students should not be
setting up food banks on campus, or missing out on their
education in order to prioritise a part-time job. PhD students
should not be left without protections or adequate pay. The APPG
recommendations on the cost of living crisis take up some of
those points. I hope that the Minister will listen to them and
act on this crisis in our universities for our students, which
will have a real-life and real-world impact on our economy.
5.08pm
(Glasgow North West)
(SNP)
It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship once again this
afternoon, Sir George. I thank the hon. Member for Sheffield
Central () for securing this important
debate as we embark on a new academic term.
The current cost of living crisis has been felt acutely by the
student population, who are particularly vulnerable to price
rises. Monthly living costs for students have risen by 17%. A
recent report by the Higher Education Policy Institute showed
that 64% of students were skipping meals to save money and that a
quarter of universities have set up food banks for their
students, as the hon. Member for Leeds North West () mentioned. Ultimately, such
pressures can force students out of university and eventually out
of the workforce. We cannot afford for that to happen.
The hon. Member for Cambridge () mentioned international
students and the difficulty they have with visa fees.
International students who are in the UK with a stipend or have
some funding sometimes have restrictions put on them that prevent
them from working, so they are incredibly vulnerable and they
really have no way out of that situation. Working could affect
their visa or their stipend, so they are in a very difficult
situation.
I note with concern the recent calls from some hard-right Tory
MPs—I hope that the Minister is ignoring them—to block particular
low-achieving school pupils from taking out loans that would
allow them to continue their studies. It would be useful if the
Minister would confirm that he will disregard such calls from
that group of MPs.
There has been a big impact on further education as well, and
those in further education often come from a more disadvantaged
background to start with. The issues around further education
have been mentioned by a number of Members, notably the hon.
Members for Waveney (), for Strangford () and for Sheffield Central.
The hon. Member for Sheffield Central mentioned the cost of
travel, saying that it was more difficult for many students to
get to courses, so I hope that he welcomes the recent policy of
the Scottish Government that gives every young person up to the
age of 22 free bus travel. That has removed so many burdens from
that group of youngsters. That is a policy that the UK Government
could implement across England and Wales. It would make such a
difference to young people, and would not be particularly
costly.
The hon. Member for Worcester (Mr Walker) mentioned childcare
costs and it is important that we consider that many students
have such costs. Being able to access the 30-hour offer would
make a big difference to them and enable them to access their
university.
Ultimately, everything that we are talking about means that
students increasingly find themselves unable to stay on top of
their studies. Grades can suffer and in some cases students will
drop out altogether. It is notable that new data from the Office
for Students affirms that students who were eligible for free
school meals are the most likely to drop out of university; in
fact, they are almost 10% less likely to complete their courses
than students from more affluent backgrounds.
We have heard a lot—from the hon. Member for Cambridge, the right
hon. Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East (Mr Brown) and the hon.
Member for Strangford, among others—about increasing maintenance
loans to keep up with inflation. The maintenance loan is
significantly higher in Scotland than it is in England. That does
not mean that it will always be enough, but it is certainly a
step in the right direction, and increasing it would be an easy
way for the UK Government to support students.
Of course, in Scotland we also have free tuition, because
educational mobility should be based on the ability to learn and
not on the ability to pay. I have great respect for the hon.
Member for Sheffield Central, but he must accept that the Labour
party is not in a good position just now on tuition fees, having
rolled back its commitment to abolish them. It would be useful to
hear where Labour is planning to go with that.
5.14pm
(Feltham and Heston)
(Lab/Co-op)
It is a pleasure, Sir George, to serve under your chairship today
and to speak on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick
and Leamington ().
I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield
Central () on securing this extremely
important debate, on all his campaigning on this issue and on his
deep expertise in it, which has been of such value to the House.
He has highlighted so many issues, as have other hon and right
hon. Members, including the creaking nature of the student
support system, the impact of increased hours of paid employment,
impacts on life chances and wellbeing, and impacts on
international students. I pay tribute to the work of the
all-party parliamentary groups for students and on further
education and lifelong learning. It is wonderful to see the chair
of that APPG, the hon. Member for Waveney (), here and to recognise the
contribution that he has made.
We have had strong contributions, including from my right hon.
Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne East (Mr Brown), the
hon. Member for Worcester (Mr Walker) and Chair of the Education
Committee, my hon. Friends the Members for Liverpool, West Derby
(), for Cambridge () and for Leeds North West
(), and the hon. Member for
Strangford (). I also pay tribute to the work of the Sutton Trust,
MillionPlus and other important research organisations. I note
the vital role performed by universities and further education
colleges in supporting students and their life chances,
especially through this difficult time, as well as their key role
in our education system and economy, and their support for
businesses, our industrial strategy and our regional growth
agendas across the country.
I am concerned that students have been an afterthought through
the pandemic and then through the cost of living crisis.
Inflation has skyrocketed into double digitals. The inflation
rate for food items stands at 14.9%. We know that the causes of
the cost of living crisis, while partly global, can be traced to
choices that successive Conservative Governments have made that
have reduced our resilience, and this is an important debate for
us to continue to have. The situation is even more acute with our
need as a nation to look at how we grow the economy and to ensure
that we have opportunities at every stage.
A report released just last week by the Higher Education Policy
Institute found that universities are being forced to take steps
to support their students during the cost of living crisis that
were previously unthinkable, whether that is having a food bank
or recognising that many need food vouchers. It begs the
question: which part of Britain is not broken? It is important to
recognise that this impacts the ability of those institutions to
support that transformational potential, which is their purpose
of supporting students to take advantage of learning and improve
their life chances. ONS research found that the cost of living
crisis affects students’ academic performance, skills
development, and health and wellbeing.
I will close with a few questions to the Minister, because he
will see that the evidence clearly points to the negative impacts
of the crisis on our students. The Conservative party should have
solutions that are in line with, and part of, how we grow the
economy, which is the first mission that we will have as a Labour
Government. Has the Minister looked at which students are most
impacted by the cost of living crisis? Will he take this
opportunity to commit to an equality impact assessment of the
impact of rising prices on students? What assessment has he made
of the cost of living crisis on discouraging applications from
students for certain courses, as has been raised by MillionPlus?
How is he working with the FE and HE sectors on the challenges
that they and their students are facing? I look forward to the
Minister’s response.
5.18pm
The Minister for Skills, Apprenticeships and Higher Education
()
It is a pleasure to serve under you, Sir George. I congratulate
the hon. Member for Sheffield Central () on securing the debate. He
is an expert on higher education in this House and is widely
respected. This is my first debate with the new shadow Minister,
and she, too, is widely respected across the House. I know that
we will have fierce debates, but I wish her well. I thank
everybody who has spoken in the debate. I completely accept the
pressures that students in further and higher education are
facing, just as I accept that most people across the country are
facing enormous cost of living challenges. I see that in my own
constituency of Harlow. I am committed to social justice and I am
keen that we do everything we can to support disadvantaged groups
to progress up the ladder.
We need to set the context: £400 billion was spent on covid,
alongside the war in Ukraine and our significant debt. However,
even with that very difficult economic context, we are still
doing everything we can to help disadvantaged students. Because
of the number of Members who spoke and the short time left, I
will write to individuals if I do not answer their points in the
debate.
I will start with FE and apprenticeships. Students in vulnerable
groups—young people in care, care leavers and those on
disability-related benefits—may be entitled to yearly bursaries
of up to £1,200. We have allocated £160 million to FE for
discretionary bursaries. That is almost a 12% increase. That
helps students with travel costs and the cost of books and
equipment. That is an issue that has been raised by the APPG.
On apprenticeships, the hon. Member for Sheffield Central talked
about the apprentice minimum wage. That increased by 9.7% to
£5.28 an hour. I appreciate that that is not a huge amount of
money, but the latest data shows that the median gross hourly pay
for apprentices in 2021 was £9.98 an hour. A 2021 survey showed
that pay increased with level of apprenticeship, from £8.23 an
hour among level 2 apprentices to £13.84 among degree
apprenticeships and £15.11 an hour among level 6 non- degree
apprentices. We are investing £40 million to support degree
apprenticeships to encourage more people to take them up. We have
had more than 180,000 since we introduced degree apprenticeships
in 2014. Those students have no debt; they earn while they learn.
I gave the hon. Member for Sheffield Central the figures for what
they are likely to earn. We know that they are going to get good,
skilled jobs.
We have increased something I was very keen on: the bursary for
care leavers. That was something I asked for and pushed for the
moment I got this post. The bursary for care leavers who
undertake an apprenticeship will increase from £1,000 to £3,000,
so I am trying to do everything I can in these difficult economic
times to help the most disadvantaged.
Let us move on to higher education. A lot has been said about the
problems that students face. We have frozen the maximum level of
tuition fees, against significant pressure. We have done
everything we can on that. We are trying to minimise the debt
burdens for graduates wherever we can. The hon. Member for
Sheffield Central mentioned transport. He will know that, for
students in South Yorkshire, there is a zoom 16-18 pass. It is
80p a journey on bus and tram.
I want to make a wider point to all hon. Members who spoke. They
talk about disadvantaged students being denied the chance to go
to university. A lot of that came up today, including from the
hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby (). Actually, the figures show
that disadvantaged students are going to university in record
numbers. Not only that, but they are about 73% more likely to go
to university than they were in 2010. That is something that I am
very proud of. The hon. Member for Cambridge () asked what I am proud of:
I am very proud that we are helping more disadvantaged students
to attend university, and that we created 5 million apprentices,
increased the number of degree apprenticeships and introduced the
apprenticeship bursary.
We previously helped students living in private accommodation
with energy bills. The hon. Member for Leeds North West () mentioned mental health. We
have given £15 million to the OfS to help universities with
mental health provision. We are doing a lot of work on that, and
I refer him to previous debates in the House on this subject.
(Ceredigion) (PC)
Will the Minister give way?
I will carry on a little bit. I have very little time because the
hon. Member for Sheffield Central needs a couple of minutes to
sum up, but I will try to bring in the hon. Member for Ceredigion
().
There is more support for students who have disabilities, who get
maintenance grants on top of that, of course. None of that was
mentioned. We give £276 million—an increase of £16 million over
the past year—to the OfS to help disadvantaged students across
our HE system.
Will the Minister give way?
I want to carry on because of the time.
Will he give way before the end?
If I can, I will. I genuinely would love more time to bring
people in.
That is a lot of money. I have examples: the university in the
hon. Member’s own constituency has a £500 cash bursary, and in
Liverpool, vulnerable students get bursaries of close to, I
think, £2,000. We are trying to target significant help at
disadvantaged students with that £276 million. The hon. Member
for Sheffield Central will know that postgraduate master’s
students can apply for loans of £12,000 per annum, and doctoral
students can apply for loans of £28,000.
My hon. Friend the Member for Waveney () talked about core funding. He
will know that skills funding is increasing by £3.8 billion over
the Parliament, with £1.6 billion extra for 16 to 19-year-olds.
We have just increased core funding by £185 million this year and
£285 million the next year, on top of £125 million, as he knows.
Wherever possible, we are trying to put more money into further
education. My hon. Friend’s college has had a significant amount
of capital funding and core funding, so I think he will be
pleased with that. I hope that also answers some of the questions
that the distinguished Chair of the Education Committee, my hon.
Friend the Member for Worcester (Mr Walker), asked.
If the hon. Member for Ceredigion () would like to come in very
quickly, I will take his intervention—I think I have two
minutes.
On rental accommodation, I am sure the Minister will agree that
too often students find themselves having to go for substandard
accommodation due to price constraints. Will he consider that in
delivering future support?
Of course, accommodation is up to the universities and private
tenants—although we also work closely with the Department for
Levelling Up, Housing and Communities—but I will look at that
important point, because we want students to live in quality
accommodation.
On the £276 million figure for the hardship fund, calculations
from the House of Commons Library suggest that, while the cash
value per student has increased in the last two years, in real
terms it has actually fallen each year, with the 2023-24 level
expected to be around 21% less in real terms than 2019-20. Will
he look again at the amount of resource going into those budgets?
Against inflation, it really is not enough.
If I can answer with a final, quick point about the £276 million,
there were lots of universities —I can give figures from up and
down the country—with bursaries of between £500 and £2,000 going
to the most vulnerable students. We are trying to target
help.
To conclude, there is one thing that has not been mentioned at
all. Everyone here has looked at this in isolation from all the
other help the Government are giving to hard-pressed families up
and down the country. It is important to remember that the
Government are spending around £94 billion—£3,300 per household
on average—helping families, which includes students in FE and
elsewhere, along with apprentices, to try and help them in every
way we can. As in Sheffield and throughout the country, many of
our universities and colleges are doing a great job in difficult
circumstances, and the Government are targeting help at those who
need it most while being fair to both students and the
taxpayer.
5.28pm
I have to say that I was not sure whether securing the last
debate before recess would do justice to our reports, but the
number and quality of contributions from colleagues prove that my
doubts were misplaced. I am grateful to everybody for their
points, and I think there were a number of common themes from
both sides of the House.
I know the Minister knows that his response does not go far
enough and that we are in danger of reversing the achievements
that have been made in widening participation in post-school
education. I hope that our reports will be helpful to him, as the
hon. Member for Worcester (Mr Walker) pointed out, in making the
case to his colleagues in Government, because the issues will not
go away until we see real change.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered the impact of increases in the
cost of living on further and higher education students
|
