Join us on FacebookThis is a guest post from John Robertson MP which has also been posted on the blog LabourList:
Today I asked the Prime Minister in PMQs why he broke his promise at a Cameron Direct event in January this year to the Save EMA campaign that he supported Education Maintenance Allowances. You may remember at the time that Tory blogger Iain Dale made a big deal about it always being Conservative policy to support EMA. But the Prime Minister showed he says one thing before an election and does another afterwards. Also so does his Secretary of state for Education, Michael Gove MP, who told the Guardian newspaper before the election only back in March that and I quote:
“Ed Balls keeps saying that we are committed to scrapping the EMA. I have never said this. We won’t.”
Yesterday I secured an Adjournment debate on the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA), which was affectively abolished in the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR). There are over 600,000 recipients of EMA in England alone who will see this allowance withdrawn and 80% of those will be the poorest teenagers in our country from families with household income below £20,810.
Now, although I am a Scottish MP I still fight for young people’s rights as a UK MP, and Scotland is where EMA was first attacked by the “Tartan-Tories” – the SNP. Last year they cut the EMA budget by 20% and axed the £10 and £20 payments. You could say I saw the writing on the wall and didn’t want EMA to suffer the same fate in England as it had in Scotland. This is a scheme close to my heart because it is based on providing a platform to poor families, which means that economic barriers will no longer stand in their way to getting an education and getting on in life.
I only hope for the Minister Nick Gibb MP’s sake that the Prime Minster doesn’t have the same level of support for him as he had for EMA or he will be out of a job by Easter! Especially as the Minister tried to link the ending of this scheme with the deficit, which only showed a lack of economic competence on his part. Firstly, because if he is telling me that taking money out of the pockets of the poorest teenagers in this country is our salvation then we are beyond redemption. Secondly it makes very bad long term economic sense to do so as according to the Treasury by 2020 the amount of unskilled jobs will be half of what they are today meaning more unskilled people will be fighting for even fewer jobs.
A 2009 survey by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development found that only 17 per cent of employers were planning to recruit from the pool of 16 year olds leaving school and only a third of employers planned to recruit those leaving school at 18. And we know that being unemployed for more than 12 months under the age of 23 years has a hugely negative impact on your future, causing a permanent scar of disadvantage. Lastly, those who have experienced long durations of unemployment in their youth, still suffer from sizeable wage penalties long into their forties.
I have spoken on this subject before, when I secured an adjournment debate in the previous parliament on 2nd February this year and if you want a good example of the difference between the previous government and the new one today then it will be this policy. For example, the last time I spoke on this issue the then Minster, Iain Wright MP, committed the then Labour government to maintaining EMA in its current form up to 2011 and beyond.
Many of the young people who contacted me following that debate, sending me their support and thanks, will now feel disappointed by politics; by having their fears and hopes raised and then crushed in a matter of months. If you don’t believe me of what happens when politicians break promises, then let me leave you with a comment on the Save EMA campaign website that touched me and I included in my speech:
Cassie Campbell - “I need EMA my mum is on benefits and I am a full-time student at college without EMA I can’t go to college I will have to drop out and I don’t want to do that”
Loading ...
If the goverment took away EMA, I simply would not be able to continue to study. I rely on that money for books for my course (considering there are lots to buy and they are not cheap) money for lunch and the money for travel fare.
Because I come from a low income background, my parents simply haven’t got the money to give me £5 a day for food and bus fare whereas those parents who earn a decent wage can afford the money for their child each day. If you took away EMA the gap between rich and poor would be even wider, and I thought that you were trying to change that. People from low income background already suffer enough, by been let down time after time that they cannot do this or do that, have this or that because of money so in a sense you are basically punishing the people who cannot work, or do work but do not earn enough. I think it is immorally wrong to stop EMA because you are damaging the lives of those who cannot afford to continue in education after 16. Without EMA I simply would not be able to continue in education, which would mean, I would not get a subitable job which then would mean un employment levels would then increase once more. In conclusion, you are gaining nothing from axing EMA, just making the whole problem a lot worse.
Why are they scrapping the EMA for eney way. Students spend this money to buy the equipment for they college corse. But dont the shops that we spend the EMA in gets tax so there for the goverment will get money back to them. In the increese of Uni fees what will leave us will a debt of £50’000 how are we going to get there if stopping the EMA will effect are education. There is a good pesentage of learners in my lesson that depends on EMA to use for transport to get to College. If the EMA is going to be scrapped the goverment is messing up the future companys and the job market out there. They are all happy because they have all well payed jobs wich is takeing money in taxs in the UK its ok for them they are not suffering like people who depend on The EMA bugget.
This is one of the worst ideas that this stupid goverment has made some people depend of this money. why now i know its after a credit crunch andthe goverment is trying to save money but they don’t need to do this fucking twats
£450m just to be in the EU. Pull that and save us all money.
I decided to stay on at school because of EMA, I’m currently in fifth year and studying Highers. I would like to go to University to study English after passing my Highers. Without EMA, I would not be able to purchase books and other support to help me in my studies. I find it extremely unfair as my mum is on benefits as well and simply cannot afford to support me. If EMA is axed then I feel that I will drop out of education, which I think is a real shame. It would cause the Government money in the end, as it is difficult for my age group to be employed. The Government will only make a small saving from the axe of EMA, I think it is pointless in the Government doing so, it will impact on thousands of teenagers from low income families.
Without my £30 a week I won’t have the motivation to go to college, I might as well quit and go straight into a job and work my way up the ranks like that. In fact the only reason why I went to college to start with was because of EMA. It goes straight into my savings account and I have not spent a penny of it on things I don’t need. I was saving up so that I could do a decent course at University and get a good job out of it. My parents can’t even afford my tuition fees let along all the other things that come with it, my mum is unemployed and my dad earns less that £10,000 a year.
Why should we suffer, the government should stop lying to us and sort themselves out. Maybe one way to do it would be for them to pay themselves out. It is there fault we are in this mess anyway
I May only be 14, but i am willing to carry on my education and go further in life with out this EMA i may not be able to do that i have planned out my future very well and it envolves a lot of money so i really do need this to reach my plans in life, the government may say they are going to take it away but there only saying it because they may e higher ranked and much more sophisticated, but there are so many bright minded teens and young adults just waiting to be higher ranks then them so they might be all high and wealthy but there only sayin this because they have enough money to give to their children and let them proceed with there education. In One of my classes the other day we have had a Huge debate over wehter they should do this and guess what, there was no advantages to this.