Child Benefit Bill

Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con): The hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Mr. Byrne) has made a thoughtful and interesting speech, and none of us would dissent from anything that he said. Many of us enjoyed walking round his constituency last year; getting to know a part of Birmingham that we had not hitherto known was an interesting experience. In 22 years as a Member of the House, this is the first time that I have taken part in a debate, other than Budget debates, to which Treasury Ministers are replying.

I want to make only three points, and I hope not to bore the House in doing so. The first echoes the comments of the hon. Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill. I am fortunate enough, in my work with the International Development Committee, to travel the world fairly extensively. We often think of certain places as being poor, but if I were king for a day, I would try to ensure that as many people as possible visited China. There are cities and towns growing up in China of which we have not heard, and which are as large as, if not larger than, cities such as Coventry and Bristol. China's growth and its skills capacity are phenomenal, and it will challenge the competitiveness of Europe and the rest of the developed world in a way that UK and European business has not even begun to grasp. We think of countries such as India as being poor, and some parts of it indeed are. However, places such as Bangalore are incredibly successful and high-tech. If we do not ensure that our young people acquire the maximum number of skills, Britain and Europe will fall behind; it is as simple as that. Unskilled and unqualified people will undoubtedly become unemployed.

My second point echoes the one that I made in an intervention. The Sure Start scheme is excellent, but perhaps we also need a "firm finish" scheme. We need an undertaking from the Department for Education and Skills that every youngster, at some stage in their school education, will have an individual interview with someone from Connexions who can go through all the options available to them. It is human nature for schools to want to encourage the maximum staying-on rate. Given the current capitation formula, the more people who stay on, the more money schools get, so they tend not to explain to youngsters that other opportunities exist, such as attending local colleges and doing NVQs, BTECs, national diplomas and various other training. I simply am not confident that such possibilities are pointed out to them. To be honest, nor am I confident that Connexions is even connected in my part of the world. The learning and skills council is an element of the machinery of government that still needs to be fitted in.

On paper, having a uniform and straightforward maintenance and support system for youngsters is a brilliant idea, but parents have got to be able to understand it. I hope that the Inland Revenue, perhaps with the help of the Plain English Society and others, will produce a booklet explaining to parents how the system works. Library briefing papers and other such documents tend to assume that all parents are rational, and that we sit down and think of all the options. Often, our children tell us what they want to do and we interact with them, and we must also remember that many parents have other dimensions to consider. They may have children with disabilities, they may be divorced or separated, or their children might themselves be carers. Life is not simple, therefore, and I hope that Treasury Ministers will undertake to produce for parents straightforward information that they can understand.

Mr. Kelvin Hopkins (Luton, North) (Lab): I am interested in what the hon. Gentleman is saying, and he is right to emphasise the role of parents. However, many parents are not competent in this regard—they are not fully literate or numerate—so the state has to intervene in such cases to make sure that young people get a good start. Will he not commend the Government for the emphasis that they have placed on teaching basic skills in primary education? That is the first base, which all children must get to.

Tony Baldry: We all want to enhance primary education. If the hon. Gentleman is right in suggesting that some parents have difficulties in that regard, that is all the more reason why we need to be confident that they understand the various choices available to them. Youngsters must not feel under pressure to leave school early because their parents or guardians do not believe that they have the financial resources to support them.

If we do not enhance our skills base, we will simply get left behind. Secondly, I hope that every youngster at some stage during their school career, before they take their GCSEs, can have a personal interview with a Connexions representative, who can go through the various options with them and ensure that they have some form of career and education plan between the ages of 16 and 19.

Thirdly, I hope that we can be confident that parents will be given some straightforward briefing, and I hope that it will be better than that given for the tax credit schemes. What I am about to say might sound rather portentous, but I am not sure that it is possible to say such things without sounding that way. I am fortunate enough to be a lawyer—a barrister—and I spend all my time construing documents. Yet when people come to my constituency surgery with information on the various tax credit schemes, I find trying to understand it all harder than dealing with High Court pleadings. How ordinary people can be expected to understand it I do not know.

Mr. Frank Field (Birkenhead) (Lab): Is not the situation even more difficult when constituents appear in our surgeries with 15 different Government documents telling them what their tax credit is? If we as Members of Parliament cannot sort out such things, our constituents certainly cannot.

Tony Baldry: There are also cases of constituents getting different letters, dated the same day, giving different amounts.

This is a non-contentious Bill that commands support throughout the House, but perhaps the icing on the cake would be a really good straightforward booklet for parents, produced with the help of the Plain English Society and others, so that we can ensure maximum take-up of the benefits that the Bill seeks to provide.

Iain Wright (Hartlepool) (Lab): I am pleased to follow the hon. Member for Banbury (Tony Baldry), not least because in his comments—which, like those of the hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow), who is no longer in his place, were non-partisan—he tried to address the principal point of the Bill.