ePolitix.com Stakeholders discuss the education plans set out in the Queen's speech.

Stakeholder response: NUT

To send a comment to the NUT clickhere

Steve Sinnott, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: "The government is right to raise the leaving age to 18. Sixteen-year-olds cannot afford to be outside education or employment. If they are, they face dead-end lives.

"Strategically however, the government has to be very careful that any sanctions do not backfire and lead to the ghettoisation of those young people who will be the hardest to reach.

"The reforms also have to be thoroughly prepared for and funded. A repeat of the botched introduction of the school leaving age in the 1970's is not an option.

"I urge the prime minister not to lose the opportunity this Bill represents. It could be expanded to rid the education service of some of the worst mistakes of recent legislation as well as introducing new ideas.

"There are many ways the Brown government committed to a social agenda could draw a line under the mistaken marketisation policies of the previous government.

"The Bill could repair our split and divided education system by bringing academies back into the local authority family of schools.

"I welcome Gordon Brown's intention to renew efforts to achieve the Millennium goals. Achieving an entitlement for all young people to high quality education is both a global and national aim.

"The Children and Young Persons Bill redresses a long-standing injustice.

"Education for children in care has always been a poor relation. Now is the chance for our most vulnerable young people to get the education provision they need and deserve."

Stakeholder response: PAT

To send a comment to the PAT clickhere

On proposals to raise the school leaving age

PAT general secretary Philip Parkin said: "Raising the school leaving age is a potential minefield that could be disastrous. We could end up with married, voting parents being disciplined or criminalised for not attending school or college.

"It is hardly surprising that some disenchanted young people do not want to set themselves up to be further alienated by compulsory 16 to 18 education or business-led training designed for purely economic reasons to fill a skills gap.

"To make them conscripts is likely to reinforce failure, leading to even greater disaffection.

"Enforcement could lead to mass truancy, disruption to other learners and staff, maybe even needless criminalisation if 'enforcement measures' are imposed. Would young people or their parents be punished for non-attendance?

"Schools and colleges will be forced to accept a host of unwilling students who will poison the atmosphere for those willing to learn. Forcing an education on teenagers will create even more youngsters with a grudge against society.

"There is not a strong case for introducing compulsory participation in education or training to 18. There is a strong case for providing high quality provision for all when they are ready to learn.

"In the spirit of lifelong learning, the exciting opportunities in education and training should be the carrot and not the stick to encourage participation.

"We see far too many young people switched off from learning as a result of an overbearing testing regime. We should increase the number of young people in education or training, but without conscription.

"We should provide appropriate opportunities but allow young adults some choice between work and/or education and training.

"If we can get it right from the beginning of a child's life, through good parenting, universal adequate funding in the early years, appropriate high quality learning and care opportunities, and joined-up services, we could avoid so many children failing or being at risk of failing later.

"Then, with the right curriculum or training programme on offer, taught in the right way, in the right surroundings, voluntary uptake beyond 16 is likely to increase."

Stakeholder Response: CMU

To send a comment to the CMU clickhere

Pam Tatlow, chief executive of the CMU Universities Group, said: "The promotion of apprenticeships and learning opportunities until the age of 18 will undoubtedly promote both skills and educational progression.

"Taxpayers will obviously want to know that the sale of the student loan book offers value for money since they will have to underwrite any future changes in the terms of student loans sold to purchasers.

"If the Treasury is to receive receipts of £6b in the next three years then the students of today and tomorrow will want a guarantee that universities receive the additional investment required, in particular for teaching and research infrastructure, to ensure that the funding of higher education in Britain reaches the levels already achieved by other OECD countries."

Stakeholder Response: ATL

To send a comment to the ATL clickhere

Martin Johnson, acting deputy general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: "It's a huge relief that there isn’t a major education bill in the Queen’s speech this year.

"Teachers, lecturers and other education staff have already got enough changes from the government on their plates without having to deal with any more.

"Today’s big challenge is for employers and further education colleges to work together and provide the right training for those young people who are currently not in employment, education or training.

"And we do mean the right training – to give them skills they will find useful for work and their future lives.

"It’s a shame we still have to remind the government that it needs to end the discrimination against FE lecturers and finally get round to paying them the same rate as those teaching the over 16s in schools.

"With no increase in money to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) we are deeply concerned about a potential financial squeeze and cuts in further education courses if the LSC directly provides apprenticeship places.

"We are also not happy about the implications of changes to the minimum wage regulations for those on apprenticeships. Those who are working should be fairly paid for that work, and not used as cheap labour.

"The reforms to improve services for vulnerable children and young people are long overdue, and should be implemented urgently.

"We expect the government to ensure the teachers designated to look after these children are given the right training and aren’t burdened with a unrealistic workload.

"All the agencies and professionals who work with children in care should share responsibility for that care – the duty should not just be left to teachers. Schools and colleges cannot be expected to solve societies’ problems alone."

Stakeholder Response: Royal Academy of Engineering

To send a comment to the RAE clickhere

A spokesperson for the RAE said: "The government has finally begun to grasp the importance of taking action to ensure the UK has secure energy supplies for the future and to keep climate change mitigation as a priority.

"However, the scale of the engineering challenge to deliver the required infrastructure is unprecedented and must be taken into account for both reliable, secure supply and reduced demand.

"New and improved technologies are essential to address the twin concerns of climate change and security of supply.

"The critical clusters of technology are nuclear, carbon capture and storage (CCS), energy efficiency including low-energy buildings and vehicles, renewables and energy storage.

"We need all of these if we are to close the energy gap, it is not a matter of choice."

Education issues

"The Academy welcomes today’s focus on education.

"Skills acquisition is a good thing for young people.

"Research evidence tells us that science, technology, engineering and maths skills are particularly valuable in terms of improved life chances for young people.

"The new engineering diploma, on which the Academy leads curriculum development, will provide a simple pathway for the acquisition of STEM skills and will enable more people to get great jobs in engineering.

"The Academy has been fostering further education and skills in engineering for a generation by forming effective partnerships with schools, FE colleges, universities, sector skill councils and employers."

Stakeholder Response: Institute of Education

To send a comment to the IOE clickhere

Ann Hodgson and Ken Spours said: "We broadly welcome the government's announcement to 'raise the participation age' because it provides a clear target around which the various social partners can collaborate to improve levels of education participation amongst 16 to 19-year-olds.

"However, like others, we feel that Ed Balls has sounded the wrong note with the focus on sanctions against young people.

"Instead, ministers should be concentrating on measures, short and long-term, to make the education and training system a place that young people would want to be.

"The secretary of state has announced some helpful measures, but the 'carrots' appear have been buried beneath a pile of 'sticks'.

"If we are to encourage a culture of lifelong learning, it has to be based on building a system that is open and based on progression, not on threats against the most marginalised."

Stakeholder Response: Edexcel

To send a comment to Edexcel clickhere

Edexcel managing director Jerry Jarvis said: "Ensuring that young people are able to receive quality education and training until the age of 18 will help secure the UK's economic future and help more young people get the best possible start to their working lives.

"Edexcel is committed to providing broad opportunities for students aged 14 to 19, outside of the traditional academic route, through qualifications that focus on employability and personal development or which can lead directly to degree programmes.

"We invest in accrediting quality work-related and vocational qualifications which are delivered in higher education institutions, FE colleges, schools, training providers and with employers. Alongside A and AS levels, we offer a wide range of BTEC qualifications, NVQs and we are involved with piloting functional skills."