(6 days, 3 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, on Erasmus, I remind my noble friend that, as I am sure she knows, we are talking about very large sums of money. It was £570 million in the first year alone, and that is with a terrific 30% discount. When large sums of money are involved, I am interested in who the beneficiaries are going to be. I am encouraged by the part of the Statement in which the Commons Minister said,
“there will be a review of the UK’s participation in the programme 10 months after our association”.
My guess is—and it will of course be tested over time—that there will be rather more students coming from Russell group universities than from FE colleges in the Midlands and the north. To a degree, that is how it must be tested, because the evidence is pretty strong that such schemes can easily become a case of “to them that have shall more be given”, and communities such as my noble friend’s former constituency and mine do not get their fair share.
My noble friend is absolutely right that one of the tests of this success will be making sure that my former constituents and his have access to this scheme and genuinely participate. As I said, the Association of Colleges’ chief executive said yesterday that this was “brilliant news” for staff and students of all ages in further education colleges:
“For students, it widens their perspective on the world, opening their eyes to different cultures and different ways of life, and for staff, the opportunity to learn from other countries on how they deliver technical education and skills is invaluable”.
We need to make sure that this is embedded going forward, and one of the tests will be to make sure that working-class kids, too, have access to this scheme.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberAs I have previously said, the Deputy National Security Adviser, on behalf of the Government, gave three different witness statements, as requested by the CPS and the DPP. We gave, and will continue to give, for all prosecutions, full evidence as available. It was a matter for the DPP to determine whether there was enough evidence to proceed and in this matter it chose not to.
Does my noble friend recall that we once had a Chancellor of the Exchequer called George Osborne? Among the many things he said—this was 10 years ago, in the dying days of the Osborne-Cameron Government—was that we should “stick together” with China and
“make it a golden decade for both our countries”
and that the aim was to make China the second-largest trading partner for Britain. All parties are entitled to change their policies, but does my noble friend have any information on when the Conservative Party made this 180-degree shift?
I very much thank my noble friend for his question. Let me be clear about some of the interesting comments in terms of where the Opposition have been. When he was Foreign Secretary, the right honourable James Cleverly, MP, who I have a huge amount of time for, called the decision to sum up China in one word as a “threat” as
“impossible, impractical and—most importantly—unwise”.
Most importantly for your Lordships’ House, the Leader of the Opposition, when Business Secretary, said that we
“should not be describing China as a foe”.
When in government, the Opposition had some interesting views on China; so did some of their Ministers. On that basis, I think we need to be very clear about what we are talking about.
(1 year ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, Back-Bench questions will follow shortly. The Minister has not yet finished.