within the text list what they are but otherwise if you are reading for their reporting is unclear what that means. it is just there, so it wasn't in anyway, i wasn't trying in any way to minimize the importance of about don't think what you are trying to convey and it is conveyed clearly the way the report is written. >> the whole thing is not clear to me and i am really frustrated about this because in fact everybody knows they msc is valuable. it unbelievably criminally is underfunded as far as i'm concerned throughout the united states of america park we don't have regional system and i think the same message i gave to our federal officials is i give to ourselves, which is let's get serious about this. what is the nominator that we have achieved yet? if we need 100 times more money in the msc system to make it functional for america's children, then for god sakes let's say that. is going to cost a lot of money. this is just rhetorical. we need peter's treatment on one

ambulance, all ambulances, how many pieces of equipment? how did the prayer to rank against others? i think we are in a very privileged position of being able to advise the government but if we advise them on rhetoric, without specifics, without recognizing the need that is on that we are going to be writing a lot of paper without having a lot of work for the recipients to get

commons presides over this 90 minute debate. [inaudible conversations] >> colleagues, please be seated. welcome to those, only the second ever sitting of the u.k.

youth parliament here in the chamber of the house of commons. as he will have heard already, because the point is being made, on the 21st of july this year, the house of commons voted to allow the u.k. youth parliament to meet annually for the remainder of this parliament to debate the subject, which you have decided should be debated. that decision, with a ringing endorsement of the outstanding success of the first-ever series of debates, which took place exactly a year ago and it was also, members of the youth president, a symbol of the commitment of the house of

commons, better to engage with civil society in general and with young people in particular, a car which i imagine by now, many of you will know, is very dear to my own heart. i mention the 21st of july, which has an historic and enduring significance for you at the parliament. three days afterward -- and if i may say so at my request to the chief executive of the parliament, on the 24th of july, i traveled to belfast because i wanted to be present on the occasion of your annual general meeting. and i was, i confess, overwhelmed on that occasion by

the warmth and generosity of the welcome that she extended to me in return for the warmth and generosity of the welcome that you extended to me, i., on behalf of the house today, extend the warmest and most generous welcome possible to each and every one of you sitting here at the chamber and two of the people who have aided and abetted to in coming here today. and i offer you that not merely out of politeness, because there's nothing wrong with that, but out of respect, respect for what you are, respect for what you do and respect for what i know you as a parliament will

increasingly become. the legitimate and respect good form for the expression of the views of young people and the engagement and debate on crucial questions, which affect you, your fellows and society as a whole. and i know that many of my parliamentary colleagues here today, from the deputy leader of the house, david healy, to the chair of the business committee, thatcher and go and from all parliaments, are united in respect for what we can learn from your own parliament. in terms not merely of enthusiasm, though they certainly have a president and the range of subjects that they discuss, which is easily

observable, but if you're representativeness as an institution. i have always been struck by the 50% if you care about your female, approximately 20% if you are from black and minority ethnic communities. in approximately 10% of you had some form of disability. so in terms of representing the kaleidoscope of modern society come at the u.k. youth parliament does it very impressively and does it and away from which the elected house of commons at south can learn. on this great occasion, i would like to say something about a very special man, who is sadly no longer with us. and that man is called andrew

rau, who served as member of parliament for midtown and then forefather shown and it can't and he sadly passed away two years ago. andrew rowe, served as mp for that constituency, was as farsighted as he was a warmhearted man, whose visual and inspiration that was to see established a u.k. youth parliament as a forum for young people to debate, to articulate, to engage with each other and to contribute to the democratic process. he is turn off minimum of fashion to establish the parliament with a relatively small number of enthusiastic supporters. i know how proud he would be today of your presence and of what you're going to offer.

and from my point of view, it's a joy and i think it is for you, to be able to welcome andrew's family who are in the gallery over there, his children and his grandchildren. you're hugely welcome and you could be so proud of what andrew did. he was truly a great parliamentarian, a thoroughly decent man and what hugely appreciated. [applause] [applause] we are going to get onto the great debates. enjoy yourselves. speak up and speak their minds. speak for yourself, speak for your fellows come to speak for your areas and recognize that

it's a great privilege and it's a privilege which should be truly rewarding for you. we're thrilled to have you. we are going to get on to the main business of the day because there is much to do as winston churchill did in very little time in which there is to do it. [laughter] order, order appeared to youth parliament will consider the first motion of the day, relating to sex education as printed on the order paper. to move the motion -- and i ask you to give him a very warm welcome. i call mr. joe vincent. [applause] >> thank you very much,

mr. speaker. may 1st thank you in a process for getting us here today. we'll greatly value how you felt this so far. mr. speaker, the highest teenage rate, an increasing number of transmitted infections among young people knows compulsory sex education in the united kingdom. this is a dire situation we find ourselves in today. in current legislation, no school in england or wales is compelled to teach their students about sex and relationships in italy the governors of the school that decide what is taught. this is a disgrace. this approach has not only left many people naïve enough nowhere in this created an adversary postcode lottery. if you don't live in the right area, you won't be taught the copyright status. because the school doesn't have to teach any of it. in fact, the only compulsory elements of sex education are contained in the science curriculum. and let us be clear, sex

education covers a wide range of issues affecting young people and these include: safe practices, transmitted infections and legal issues surrounding consent and abuse. these, mr. speaker are clearly beyond the realms of science. it is this lack of education that is haunting society. the most recent figures showed that almost 43,000 young people, it is up to 19 had an abortion in 2008. and in different terms, that's 117 abortions every day for those aged up to 19. other countries have shown that by teaching your people about sex and relationships from an early age, teenage pregnant he, sexually diseases: mr people or complement about themselves. we can't say that it singly or in person pulled from the tribes of previous generations. it makes sense if you teach a young person the basics of what

is a good, healthy relationship is before there'll want to sex him about the confidence to make healthy decisions. sex education in this country is too little too late. we need to wake up to the facts. when he took what were doing to young people and say this is enough. why are we waiting until there is a problem to teach young people about sex education? were treating it like were covering up behind a 30-ton. sex educationists circulate to stop the damage before it's too late. on a similar note, if we are serious about our commitment to ensuring a person is seven left in the dark, but we must remove a parents right to take their child out of sex and relationships education. it would be ridiculous of me to stand here and i mention religion. and i recognize the difficulty they propose to certain religions, which is why support the previous government's proposal to allow the source to

their belief in education, too. i cannot stress enough how important it is that no young person falls through and not. thank you. [applause] >> thank you for getting us off to a confident, clear starter. there lots of people to hear from today, but i do want you to appreciate the blood of my parliamentary colleagues are you today. as evidence of their strong support for you as an organization, for each of you as an individual. timor 10. he's very shy, but your handout. lynn brown,, not. kerry mccarthy was the labour member of the minister and no doubt the colleagues who is now leaning forward expectantly.

we wouldn't want not to notice you and it would indeed be impossible for any length of time. [laughter] is great to have you. i call ms. maria finnerty to oppose the motion. [applause] >> thank you, mr. speaker. we are a generation like no other. and the world in which information can be trained mended at the click of a button, it is unsurprising that young people develop ideas influenced the media. images dominate media activity and often presented socal and so recklessly that it is fido that our young people are provided with immediate responsible counterpart to sex and

relationship education. 76% of teens surveyed across the country, including those in my own constituent he thought that they needed more sex education. young people are clearly provided with inconsistent and in opera. sre. however, teams that take sex education to young could exacerbate the effects of the media. i'm sure you'll agree that an understanding of relationship cannot simply be taught on the chart board, but requires experience of life, which primary children do not possess. any primary school teacher will uphold, promote and encourage the role of parents as an educator, particularly between the impressionable ages of five and 10. it is simply not necessary for

the state to interfere with the powers and race to enter this crucial that that delicate moral issue with their own young children. essentially, we are experiencing a traffic laws of the child. and what, high street reveals a distressing turn to the adult design. children with playboy symbols. our children are being sexualized too young and we must aim to protect this short-lived innocence. sre is simply an appropriate within primary curriculum. the issue quite clearly does not lie within the thought, but how thoroughly and how consistently. the sex education recently brought up the main concern of youths is in my normal? we must not do love young men

and particularly young women to their self image is tormented by a media which often fails to acknowledge differences in shape, size and appearance. we must dispel the illusion that they must conform to the media image of perfection and teach them and set the value of their own unique bodies. i believe that teaching children sex education at primary school will be too much to young. let us defend the innocence of childhood. it is a sedentary school age that sre becomes crucial for the health and well-being of millions of young people. thank you. [applause]

>> maria, thank you for an excellent contribution. now, who wants to take part in this debate? any people to indicate, and you've been told how to do so. >> we are separated by or social backgrounds more than anything else. therefore would be blind to believe that when unilateral policy would be the answer. what is needed is a policy-based and a solid aim to reduce, teenage pregnancy rate venture promote all aspects of relationships. sex education is not a. one size does not fit all to solve this problem. it's a waste of time, money and resources that an effective policies launched the entire country. education is bad for ignorance. ignorance will exist not only to

pass an exam, but how to take care of their own well-being. with the right education and the right to help comes the rights of the health education. it is not a question of morality, but a question of equality. why should some children in this country have education when others do not? they also have some form of personal health education and sex education as a new part of action that came through in a local area priorities for what they wanted to do. at only 1.6% of people who voted out the dirt education was an issue. however, 60% of young people feel that their education is out of touch. the government has to take responsibility twos education. for inequality, which affects

the basic well-being of the human being is unacceptable in state society. financially, sexual education is highly viable. if you teach teenagers about prevention measures, then it would reduce the cost and accept thousands each year, thus helping the 20 billion pounds efficiency and productivity savings the government had introduced this year. but in education needs to be on people. the right topics are introduced, the numbers continue to rise, money wasted. this is why a curriculum finalized the local level and meet the needs of each young person. this way, every young person is to be valued and every young person in this country can be equal. [applause]

>> young gentleman with the red tie at the back. >> thank you, mr. speaker. other members weekdays a fast growing and serious issue. >> from which part of the country? >> i was mips -- [inaudible] as my reasonable friend that in the past three years we have a sre relationship and people in my constituency sex education when it exists is very limited, often focuses on contraception, inception and not getting pregnant, but it doesn't tackle the issues of feelings, emotions, competence or communication. and we need to put this in an appropriate cultural context. and also i would like to remind the honorable members here that the children and families those in parliament in some concessions along the way due to

our position. not me personally and my constituency believes that this is an absolute disgrace and a complete betrayal to young people who actively requested that sex education is to be better provided. [applause] >> magnificent. the suit were very reluctant to go first. can we have someone from northern ireland. chairwomen there. >> i'd like to look at this from a large perspective first of all. i believe teenage pregnancy is an appropriate measure of the excessive quality of sex education jurisdiction. it's often about to say with the highest in western europe, but that's in context. first of all, 1971, 50.6 births were teenage mothers. however, in my own region, north of ireland, only 23 were to

teenage mothers. but the massive decrease. and i can perhaps attribute type to the education is initiated by or department of health. a 6.6% decrease since 2000, despite the fact they were come pretty assistant during the 90s. the point would be that we are at severe risk of over sexualizing our primary school children. their innocence should be safe, not sacrificed for the sake of a statistic. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. the young lady here. >> bobby simmons. i feel we have misnamed this debate. i feel that relationships, are more important and this is why i've completely wholehearted he

agree with the decision to take them to rsa. we have our priorities wrong. relationships should concur. relationship is key to good, safe and informed sex. we need to look to relationships first. but then again, i'm not saying that sex is wrong. it's not wrong to have. it's good and it can lead to better things. [cheers and applause] and with that, it shows they guess we are extreme deep sexualizing our primary school children. but why should we teach them about relationships? why should we teach them about life? why should we teach them about how to have good relationships and then it could lead onto sex. it is not wrong for sex, but yet it's too early.

therefore, i think we should teach in more context of private school relationships and then move onto sex. so my point here is that we have our priorities wrong. relationships first, leading to and that's how we should educate our children. [applause] >> young men they are. yes indeed, sir. >> yes, i'd like jamaica plain first of all about age in primary school. i can't imagine praised by telling this is what happens when you get an. it shows that relationship first and other things in relationships to sex education that you can bring an earlier and think about and education primary school defensible.

it must be mentioned that he pushes a button in today's society and you see images they are learning from friends or roommates. the government has an opportunity to tell people versed about sex enemies to keep up with the media speed and sexual imaging. thank you. [applause] >> members of the parliament, we've been joined by tumor colleagues. valery who is worse outcome a labour member. and allison mcgovern is with us as well. the thank you both for coming. >> my name is landry ever allowed, of london. i think it's important that we keep the innocence of young people. i don't think it's a good idea to corrupt the minds of young

people into thinking i'm going to catch and std if i do this and do that because i wouldn't want my brother coming home again told me today learned about and chlamydia. that is not good at all. also we've got in primary schools i'm sure they teach sex education from the age of year five. they teach them about sex, the basics, not about sexual transmitted infections. that's when they start to learn more in detail about what's going on if you do this and you do that. so we should keep it at that instead of making them think i'm five years old, when i get to lebanon to this and this is going to happen to me. now. [laughter] >> thank you. colin ashworth.

>> my name is owen ashworth from halt the north was. young people with the quality of sex education is diabolically of the information they have taught today. that is the best case they can get worse for some individuals, which has gotten a disability get no sex education because it's the social norm. [applause] >> the young woman over there. >> johnny davis from bristol. as it has been said before, this is not about teaching girls about std's for using a.

it's teaching gross to have a healthy relationship in the future. his teaching about confidence, and in my normal thing, same everyone develops at different stages. everyone is ready for sex at a different age and this is not about the facts and the figures and the birds and the bees. they should be left to when you're older. the young people are having sex from the age of 11 or 12. and if we left it too late, these people can already get pregnant. i have known by people of that kind of age that i've got pregnant. we need to teach people about the respect and when the right time is a need to teach that not necessarily from site, but from a quite l&h. i would have someone tell me, maybe they should drink some more alcohol, then they'd be ready for their first time, which is completely out of

order. no one should have to feel pressured into anything. the age of consent, std's, everything else. not enough is put on feelings, personal appearance and confident to say no until you are ready and in a healthy relationship. [cheers and [applause] >> thank you very much indeed for what you have to say. have we got a female member from the west midlands who might like to contribute, no? yes, i think we have. [inaudible] i just like to say in private schools i think we should secure the relationship and making sure they have a healthy relationship between the persons. it's not actually that much more familiar and used to be improved on.

the thing is what needs to be improved on we also need to government relationship and sex, but also we have new sent this for these children to. u.k. i think maybe we should have this game, which then goes to school, which young people would feel more comfortable talking to persons like that. i think some teachers feel awkward and i cannot sex education in that situation should be -- [inaudible] thank you. [applause] >> whoever got from wales who was waiting to speak? young woman mayor. thank you. >> i have been taught nothing of relationships or sex education at her.

i got nothing until i was in biology lessons, i thought how you actually got pregnant and how humans reproduce. i was utterly shocked and that's probably different as i'm sure a lot of people's parents would give them that information. but i simply believe in primary school age they should be taught about safe and loving relationships. by your parents or stepparents order who brought you up and is developed here because that is the way forward on that. and i don't think that in secondary school it should be brought into much more depth, not only do things such as pregnancy and sdis, but also

more the relationship side of it, so that it can be attacked as a good team, which is like the dangers that are always shocked to you, that you almost do it because it's dangerous. and i learned far more from the show that maria mentioned that i have ever learned in school, which i think is just wrong. [applause] >> i'm going to call the young woman from buckingham. >> hello, i am at their psyche. ladies and gentlemen, britain

has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in europe and there was a social and political reasons for this. but the most paramount thing about rectifying this issue is education. we need to educate young people on sex and relationships. and it is not just making it compulsory, but we need to have a basic standard of sre and schools. see, if we look at the system at the moment, the fluctuations between different schools, different counties is now says. some of my friends have had comprehensive and consistent sre education, whereas i in my entire life can count about three and a half hours. two of those were in primary school when i learned about how the human reproductive system works. one of those within europe when i walked into a biology class and that is slightly more in

depth about how the human reproductive system works. and one of those was 45 minutes in which i learned how difficult it was to put on a condom. so the thing about it is we need to prevent young people from learning about relationships and sex through google and costa. we are thoroughly distorting the ideas the better relationships. we need to teach young people about contraception, about safe back, but relationships, but how to spot an abusive relationship before it starts. it is a huge thing. and for those who say that sre is by the pairings for the children -- [inaudible] who feel thoroughly mortified about having to talk with parents, raise your hands.

[inaudible conversations] cameras in my hands, mom, if you're watching as well. [cheers and applause] every single context they form an existence has had. okay, we start when we were teenagers. [applause] >> right, before this debate is found up with that time -- i'm going to create time for two very short contributions. young women here. and then for the east of england. just at 10 yeah speaker. i believe that it's paramount not only to teach children and young people about what is a healthy relationship and how to

manage one's, but to help teach them about managing quality and to bring the policy and society. and the only way to do studies teacher and from from a young age that is perfectly acceptable to have same sex relationships, for example. i'm not in my constituency, there still is a lot of that occurs and i'm sure the same approximation. and the only way to tackle this is to teach children from a young age that is perfectly acceptable to have the same sex relationship and it's perfectly normal to have a relationship and that's the only way to stop this inner quality that so does occur. [applause] >> thank you for that speech. as you can taught me the real impact. east of england, whoever got from the east of england? young woman here.

[inaudible] >> why is it so important because why should a young person be free to be intimate and have sex when it's not safe over the edge number they could access a much different information when you could go to a school in a safe environment of veteran teachers. i think it's much better. and also, what information you find i know quite a lot of young people that would want to know about it and the only other solution is the internet because personally i wouldn't want my parents to talk about sex with my parents. i would be able to do it. i think it's better that it's taught in a safe environment rather than going to the internet for your produce a much different information. [applause] i'm afraid that excise the time available for speeches. please don't be upset or in any way discouraged if you didn't

have the chance to speak in this debate. there were other debates upcoming as you know. if you're keen to contribute, please stand and i'll try and get as many of you as they possibly can to have your say. i call and i hope he'll give a warm welcome as i call her, ms. felicity stone hill. [cheers and applause] >> thank you, honorable speaker. i would like to thank all of you for a very valid points. sex and relationship education is a new topic to be debated and i myself am honored to be able to discuss a crucial topic with all of you today. but compulsory sex and relationship education is something that is strived for and it is something we have been campaigning for a further five years. last year we were just days away from making compulsory sre laws and yes, we did have a disappointing outcome. but i believe is a unified

organization we can make the government set up and listen to her campaign. i would like to mention us as our dependence and by many others before her, that this is not just sex and sex education in the anatomy of it. this is sex and relationship education. many believe teaching children about relationships ring on each such as primary school is finally important to their development. and those children should understand the needs of relationships, such as trust and respect. not just respect for yourself, the respect for one another. maybe with this knowledge as they mature, we can have a generation with a better attitude towards them. today we're asking what age should education be applied? somewhat argue secondary school. the connect independent sre, said many worked successfully to provide sre, even in faith organizations with their particular surrounding the delivery of sre. also, it was highlighted this

education is strongly valued by parents and young people. right now, our generation could have a much bigger view, from things such as peer pressure and as bernie mentioned, sexualized media format. and this can lead to repercussions such as teenage pregnancy, which is something for all fully aware of as we've heard so many times. this can lead to negative opinion of her generation and this is not the way that young people to be represented. i think most of us can agree that sex education is important to young people with the right education, teenagers know what to say now. so what i'm asking you today is to think about your own experiences and decide which you think could have been done differently. anything current sex education would've affected you or change her attitude toward sex and relationships today. thank you. [applause]

>> felicity, thank you for winding up our debate so welk yr winding up our debate so well. the debate really has been very striking, characterized by people speaking with knowledge, with passion, with poise. and i think you'll find that the serious media will treat you with great respect because what you've done has been frankly fantastic. we now move on because it's time for the youth parliament to consider the second motion of the day related to university tuition fees have printed on the order paper. to move the motion, please give them a warm welcome. i call mr. james bartel. [cheers and applause] >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, as members will be aware, a few weeks ago, brian brown published his report into the future of higher education

in this country. lord browne listed the cap and university tuition fees, paving the way from raising fees to an average of 6000 pounds. mr. speaker, this price in fees is absolutely necessary if we are to maintain high standards in our education system. the reality is that at the moment we are reaching a crisis point in university funding. many universities are starved of cash with which your cuts of some 2.9 billion pounds to university and there is a massive gap to fill. the director general of the russell group, which represents 20 of the uk's type university said we desperately need our money if we are to give students the education they deserve. mr. speaker, there is a real risk that standards and universities will fall if investment is not sustained. but of course, mr. speaker, quality is not the only factor

we should consider. turner should be at the heart of our university system. we must all remember that students do not pay a penny for their university education. you don't pay a penny until you leave. nobody will pay for their education until they've left universities, they started working and they are earning over 21,000 pounds a year. if their wages go down, so will the payment. if they stop working, the nonpayment will stop as well. mr. speaker, that is fair. because in the end, the person that benefits more from having a degree is the student. if you have a degree, you can get better paying jobs which would be significantly harder if he didn't have a degree. it's estimated over the course they graduate with an average 23.5% more than somebody who doesn't have a degree. so why should the taxpayer has to pay for the privilege of that

young person to have enough extra money? turning to the issue of debt, people are rightly worried about the level of debt they get into at universities. what they should think about, amounts they would add to the level of national debt in this country if the taxpayer had to put a gap in the funding. the debt we get into at universities in goa, compared to the 952 billion pounds of debt, which our generation has been set but because of the economic mismanagement of the previous government. it is true and that is a record that the previous government should be ashamed of and a record for which, mr.'s weaker are yet to apologize. mr. speaker -- are back again, this is true. no mr. speaker, in this debate we have a clear choice. we can vote for bill

universities come which are funded to a fair contribution from graduate or we can say no. the students don't have to pay any more. we will then have to upset that we have third-rate universities, which gives students decrease of little value. i know the choice i would go with. i hope also share in a few and i commend this motion to the house. [applause] >> thank you for that very robust opening speech. to oppose the motion, i shall in a moment i'll mr. connor morgan. i know you'll give him a warm welcome. and i just informed members of the youth parliament. but, will say some words and irish gaelic and he will then, for all of our benefit, repeat the media in english. mr. connor morgan. [cheers and applause]

[speaking in native tongue] >> loosely translated that was thank you, mr. speaker. it was a great honor to stand before you and have the opportunity to address you in irish now back to thank you for the opportunity. cop mark 70,000 pounds -- the amount a student will pay is 32,000 pounds, the amount of data never suitable patient they cast the left as indicated in the steamy affair. then they put this in perspective. the average wage in the u.k. each year is 25,543 pounds. but let me ask you something.

is that very reason the capital tuition fees, educational become a privilege only for those that can afford it? [cheers and applause] is it just that the members of parliament who have an education paid for the state may expect us the innocent and disenfranchised this economic mess to pay for the mistakes they have made. as of right turns are we as young people are considered or constantly being told we are the future? our future appears to be a burden of debt and uncertain job prospects. we are the representatives of young people. we believe education is to write that everyone should be entitled to. we do not believe the welfare class should pay a factor and we most certainly do not believe we should be expected to begin our life trapped beneath a burden of death of up to 30,000 pounds. this also meant 5% of young people, all of whom opposed nothing.

we do not think the young people in these proposals have been adequately consulted and that those who choose not only to maintain education began an enormous debt, but they are choosing to worsen an already entirely unjust circumstances. what kind of society do we live in when one of three young people choose their university based on how much it will cost them? for panic education system allows them to be left behind? account decision makers on the latest of young people, but also make rash decisions -- i can ever pronounce this word, decision so negatively affect the lives of many. we must stand up come we must. we must send a clear message to decision-makers that our education must never be a compromise. thank you. [cheers and applause] >> thank you and congratulations.

can i just issue on appeal? i'll try not to make the mistake myself, but the appeal is if you've already spoken, please don't stand at this stage because obviously there's lots of people who have another chance to speak at an invite to give them that opportunity. perhaps we can at the young woman here. yes, you. [laughter] >> no disrespect, this young woman here. >> i'm alex from the midlands. but kind of society do we live in where you could date job where you have to go on to university and the degree is not a level. we should be able to leave school and then go get training argot apprenticeships into that. now i've got to go into debt to get a job that's not as good as we would've gotten four years ago. it's not right. [applause] >> whoever got from the northeast england?

motives, got some young men here. >> thomas robinson from middlesboro and northeast. young people in bittersweet constituency by midterm report suggestions for him. and middle story we have been magnificent teesside university, which was recently named university here, the 16th out of 23 and middle spurt are socially deprived, so it's obvious that our young people do find it hard to pay to go to university, even when they're academically able. we believe the rising tuition fees will make our higher education system belly disco or the rich can afford to go and the poor cannot. and we urge the coalition government not to make such a devastating decision, which will no doubt exclude so many young people from achieving their true potential. thank you. [applause] >> someone from london. young women here. >> barnburner boren --

[inaudible] i should go to the university next year. i suspect quite a few of you are. how michael and pay pay my tuition fees when i leave, but also how mike went to live and have a social life when i fall into the as i would get nothing. i look at the lowest amount that the government can possibly give me. how many times do you hear i learned friend from my learned colleague. there learned because they go to university. how many bmps haven't been to university? they practically all have in their charge take that away from our generation, away from us. is that really fair? [applause] >> thank you. what about somebody from the west midlands who hasn't spoken before. what about the young man here. yes. >> thank you, speaker.

my name is tommy and i am from birmingham. at the universities that allow the tuition fees at 10,000 pounds a year. a young student in the university will attend 50,000 pounds. working-class demands, like my constituency, may be put off and go to the university and following their dreams. these universities and institutions for the rich and not the institution for the talented. [applause] >> can we have somebody from wales? who have the cup from wales? two people standing for miles. yeah, the young woman here. [laughter] >> how many of you live in this

state? [inaudible] well, seeing as most of you i disagree because some emily is may be able to afford their tuition fees. some may not as they might have more bigger families. but people with vigor families would stop their children from going to university. or would you stop them from having more children? and from my point of view, i would say to stop them -- stop the tuition fees from getting tinier as some people might not be able to afford them and some may, but the people who can't, then you should think of them more than the people who can. [applause] >> thank you. what about the southeast? what about the young gentleman here? yes. >> the young man from buckingham. may i point out that the

government has promised that should university tuition fees drop, there will be enough money to get from student loans or more scholarships to cover the cost? now i actually think that the government and the loan repayment threshold actually puts them into a different decision because they will have more money and they may not get it back. yeah, 40% cuts in the university budget are over four years. it is inevitable that we have to stand against it because simply we can't. what we should focus on now is how much university fees will rise by, whether there were still be a cap or not. whether we're going to turn into a free market, where universities and churches much as they play. [applause] >> to do we have somebody would like to contribute from the east

of england? i think the young woman in the back is about to explode. [laughter] 's >> thank you, speaker. i am from the university and i am very proud of what i'm doing right now. when i had about tuition going up, the next day it was shocking. there were -- discerning mac i do not agree with what he is doing. you have the ability of what it's causing. add value to get a career, not a jot. i don't think you should say you have go and you don't need a degree. but i want to get a degree. the one thing i've realized, cleverly, with economics, they

said just recently, that there is a public or universities, that they go private. this is a process that happens in america and we see how unspent our process is in america that sees bitterly equaling encourager blames the amount we pay and i? i be horrified to have to leave to the death of 50,000 pounds. it's a privilege we have the universities in the u.k. so lord browne, please consider them because i do not agree personally as students who have to now think about okay, if the university. it's a massive thing. and to conclude one argument that i won't say about lord browne. there is a standard in terms of the points. future taken into account the

budget for them to pay. students will not be eligible for financial report integrates were below the standards. so what is the standard to detain universities? [applause] >> i'm looking for a speaker from yorkshire and humberside. we've got a whole gathering of you there. what about the young woman with blond hair. yes, yes. >> i just like to say that in 2008, i actually headed in the house of lords and for abolishing university tuition fees. in two years time i still agree that it should be not to your son where we are by what we wanted and was to lower it to not have existed soever and cut

the education they deserved. and it's not working that way. i understand the universities need the funding, but if i'm coming from somewhere else, i mean, not two days. not completely. without the other other day trying to write for next year. i thought this one screen and i could think about was the death of money and how much i wanted to go and how much i knew there's nothing more that i want to go to university. i've always wanted to go. that's something i've always wanted to do. and now i'm doubting whether i can. thank you. [applause] 's >> can we have a speaker from northern ireland, please, which is what we're looking for. [inaudible]

.. steve. [inaudible] we cannot fund gorn more people. we live in america -- and i

believe it would create more of an aristocracy. [applause] >> it is time for somebody from the northwest. and actually, the moment they girls are out doing the boy so we need to call young men at this stage. peter, is it you? yes indeed it is you. welcome. >> i represent -- and like to jog your attention to -- [inaudible]

i wonder if you can tell me what is there about this. students at the moment pay the same that those locally, so in the e.u. if you came from the e.u. to study in scotland, you pay what the scots pay, which is nothing. if i were to study in scotland i would have to pay 1175 pounds probably more. i live in the e.u.. i am english and i can't study in scotland for the same money. how on earth is that fair? [applause] >> what about the young man just at the end of that little court if? you, you are looking around. no, the check to your right. yes, you. indeed. welcome. >> ben lacy.

the government can't afford to put any more money into the university system, which is what is causing this rice to each individual in student fees, but the other option is, the truth is there are too many people being driven into universities when it is not the right option for them. more partnerships and more work placement would mean less strain on the university system and allow government to fund those spaces and give them the education they need, without driving up debt to that individual. [applause] >> okay, you have been waiting very patiently. >> thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the academies education system should return to the latest system. when a brown report is adopted the coalition -- we are told

with a the kaplan piece we will have no effect on young people. opinion such as this demonstrate how to -- even going as far as to cutting at the annual program which encourages young people to attend the university. generation of politicians that attend universities for free and sure thousands of disadvantaged young people from reaching their potential. no that there is going to be the university tuition fees, the future jobs bunch of benefit and of course surely young people are in a more than most. [applause] >> i am looking for a female speaker from the southwest. can we have a female speaker from the southwest? okay, your good self. >> i am from dublin.

just some rough numbers here. a three-year degree for the current university levy, 9900 pounds. student accommodation for the first tier 150 pounds a week in 40 weeks is 6000-pound. the second year 52 weeks, 9100-pound, 9100-pound. books for degree each year, 300-pound, transport to and from university per and am 500-pound. this gives a conservative total of 35,500 pounds. now consider raising the levy for the university brandon. recalculate this total and you get 46,000 pounds and 600 plus 2.5% above inflation. now consider a medical degree for seven years, and then if someone wants to go to a university the cost could go up to 12-pound a year. now in effect this is

discriminating against young people from poor backgrounds and i believe that everyone should be born into the world with an equal rights to succeed. even though this is never going to be achieved i think that we should try and move one step further towards that or in this case, prevent the government from moving a step backwards. thank you. [applause] >> here here, thank you. once again time is their enemy and to conclude the debate i do need to call mr. daniel palmer. [applause] >> thank you mr. speaker. i've always wanted to say that. there it is. what do you think the effect would be if tuition fees were to rise? that is a question i've been asking young people and they came back to me and said that people from low or middle income families will be put off from going to the university, causing them to be institutions for the

rich only. they said a rise in tuition fees would also cause the gap between the rich and the poor to increase and said it would be unfair that people who cannot afford to go to university should be deprived of the opportunities of those who can't. now there has been a lot of strong support and justification for a rise in tuition fees. some of these being that universities and always the right path ferber want to go down to get a higher paying job but the rich should be promoted by the government said said his apprenticeships come and college education. they argue it is a rise in tuition fees would deter people to fool around for a couple of years at the taxpayers expense and set the reducing member people which go to university increases the value am the worth of a degree. fairness. it has been mentioned in the media quite a lot recently and also in this house today. i would like to ask the house to think about these following questions before they vote.

is it fair that the people who cannot afford to go to university don't have the same opportunities than those who can't afford to do so? equally, sit there that the taxpayers should pay for your education when you take all the benefits? youth parliament. should university tuition fees rise? [applause] >> thank you for another lively and well-informed debate, which i hope you enjoy it. again i say to people who didn't get called, don't despair. have another go. this i'm afraid is the daily experience of colleagues when normally the demand to speak exceeds the number of slots available. youth parliament will now consider the third motion of the day and the last of the morning session, relating to job opportunities as printed on the order paper. to move the motion i call

mr. mohammad abbas honey if. [applause] >> thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker members of the youth parliament, education is the passport to the future for tomorrow belongs to those who favor it today. how many of us are prepared at 16? how many employers want to employ 16-year-olds in the current economic climate? by giving young people to extra years of school or training we are giving them breathing space. an extra two years to gain additional skills, an extra two years to prepare but most importantly a possible two years in the -- y. through 16 euros out in the cold economic climate right now when we can do something about this? that is why support raising the age to 18 immediately. the school age is rising to 18, however survey opportunities for young people are decreasing month by month. cuts haven't been implement it everywhere.

young people are finding it difficult to get jobs or even internships as older more educated people are taking them. the office for national statistics shows there are currently 742,000, 18 to 24-year-olds who are unemployed. some may save the school isn't for everyone and not everyone is an academic but let me ask you something. who said you have to pour your head into books for another two years? who said you have to do exams for another two years? you can do practical partnerships and part-time education or training if you are employed, self-employed. as we heard last week at this very -- releasing another 490,000 jobs. is that there? is that fair for 16-year-old to leave school knowing that 490,000 jobs are being cut and his or her chances have become even more difficult? is met there for them to another two years and possibly have a stronger case to gain a job when the economy has recovered? the extra two years also gives

the government time to source more jobs for those who intend to leave education at 18. this way young people have time to build more academic or practical skills be a training accountant or a decorator. work experience is another major factor. one experience is not enough for young people to decide which course they want to choose and turn into the future career. work experience provides invaluable experience. provides people to learn directly about working life and allows them -- i believe we need more experience. some people may say that 16 and 17-year-olds have the right to choose to go to work or stay in school or training. simple answer to that is, how in this climate will a 16-year-old be able to find a job that so many others are fighting for the job with education and experience? being unemployed at such a young age has a long-term impact. do we really want is for young people?

this isn't about me or you. this is about us are going to stick together and work on the bigger picture, getting our young people the best possible start in life in tough times. i believe staying in school until 18 is the way forward. thank you are very much. [applause] steam ahamed, thank you for that splendid and articulate speech to open our debate. just before i called the second speaker to oppose the motion i would like to mention that jim dobbin, my parliamentary colleagues from the northwest if memory serves me heywood and middleton is present and behind him, looking suitably self-effacing as in beer but this is the honorable gentleman from aldrich brown hills mr. richard shepherd. so we will welcome him. [applause] and last but not definitely not least i think lurking behind the chair is the honorable gentleman, the member from bowls over, mr. dennis skinner.

[applause] i want very warmly to welcome dennis, because he is a parliamentarian who has always spoken his mind without fear or favor on every subject, and if memory serves me correctly, he entered the house on june 18th,. and he has served without interruption since, for 40 years, four months and 11 days. he is a very senior member. dennis you are very welcome. [applause] >> strayed from the coal face dennis just said to me.

thank you dennis for being with us and giving your encouragement. tony baer who retired from a house in 2001, famously said, and not with dennis's, tony blair said any purpose of the oldest to give encouragement to the young. so there we are. to oppose the motion i call mr. adam osmond. [applause] >> thank you very much for this opportunity for everybody here to get a new facebook profile picture. [laughter] allen sugar, richard bronson, delius smith, three people who built themselves up from nothing, three people who worked hard for what they wanted, three people who got where they wanted to be. but what do all of these people have in common? they all left school at 16.

i am not for one minutes ago suggesting that everyone should go out and get a job when they are 16 because we all know that the jobs are simply not out there. the point is, everyone should have a conscious choice to continue with education or get a job at 16. nobody should be forced into education against their will. that is a presumption frankly originating from the dark ages. it will cost 60 million pounds to keep everybody in education until they are 18 and in a time of cuts, that is ludicrous. education is not for everyone. and i appreciate it has been said already that this motion does not just include education by training and apprenticeships as well. however, it must be said that with the loss of the connection service in most local authorities due to the cuts last week, it will be harder than ever to find these placements. the work connections did to get young people into apprenticeships and training is invaluable and will be sorely

missed. because of this lack of support to young people, job opportunities will be lost and youth unemployment will rise. these people who would have left and found a job at 16 will be forced to say in school and possibly become a disruptive influence in the classroom. there is a point in my area. a nice little plug. his father's a owner of a local sweets shop. the boy helped out with his father in the shop for generations, as generations have gone before. when he turned 16, his father was taken ill and could no longer work. under the motion put before you today, he could not take this business on. are we really saying they wish to see this family sweet shop and other businesses sold up the cassette 16 he has to be in education and is clearly not mature enough to run a business? nowadays, employers increasingly preferred to take on workers who have ample work experience needed to do the job.

so by writing the age of 818 -- 18 u. of two years less work experience compared to somebody who left at 16. for what? a few extra qualifications? one life experiences more valuable than anything. extend this to the end of the university. you will have six years less work experience than a graduate of the same age. what does the graduate have? eighth two-2-degree in klingon, a 40,000-pound debt and they are unemployed. how does keeping a young person out of the system for six years solve our nation's youth unemployment crisis? the answer, it doesn't. [applause] >> i'm looking to call people from parts of the country is so far have been slightly underrepresented in the debate and beginning with wales. somebody from wales who wants to speak. the young man there, please.

>> josh from wales. given today's economic climate this country does not have the money to fund qualifications to some people who to be frank don't want them. there are some people who are quite happy to leave school at 16 and go work in a shop. there are some people who are quite happy to settle down, have a family and live on jobseekers allowance for the rest of their lives. i don't see how these qualifications will benefit them. it is a total waste of money. [applause] >> thank you. i see we have enjoined by the honorable member from birmingham, give us a wave. [applause] thank you very much for joining us. i'm looking to call someone from the west midlands. the young man there at the end who just had his hand up.

>> a new recent survey conducted by -- we found one in three young people who don't receive enough support from education system. is the pride we failed these young people for an extra two years? you don't agree that education becomes about passing exams. we need to change this and change education so we are producing branded young people that have the skills to go into employment, to go to university and only then can we meet society's demand and take our education system into the 21st century. [applause] >> i'm looking from someone from london. hands up, somebody from london. the young woman there. yes, your good self. >> i represent london. ladies and gents, can we take into consideration that the government would like to cut people like -- as well as they

are now hiring the age to 18 for people to take -- stay in school. they want people to go and stay until 18. however, they want to cut down the people that get into university. at the end of the day, the people that get their extra qualifications and get into university have -- we have lowered our hired the age of joe barton james. who is going to get a job to pay that much debt off? everyone says education is not for everyone. some people wanted in some people don't. internships and job opportunities and -- is named for people. academics and education and to get our heads in the books is needed for others. can we think about this wisely? wasting money and saying how people cannot invest and how the lady back of the band said that

she actually wants to learn not to get a career but learn to get her degree. can we take this into consideration, please? thank you. [applause] >> i'm looking to call from someone from the east of england. who is from the east of england? a young woman there. you deserve to be called because i called you earlier and someone thought that i was calling them so go ahead. >> to consider that the motion is not to keep everybody and lessons until they are 18 is to keep them in education, not necessarily in books. we can have apprenticeships, work experience and work with books alongside job opportunities. everybody knows what they want to do at 16. i am fortunate that i know what i want to do at 16 but not everybody does. keeping them in education for two more years might help them gaining an idea of what they want to do when they are older plus the rising university fees

the government is insisting on would have not help to get more qualifications to help them get a better job in the future? [applause] >> yorkshire and humber side. yorkshire and humber side. sir, let's hear from you. >> i think not everybody is capable to stay on after they are 16. nick brewer. everybody is capable to stay on the extra two years. i think the have got to make the choice whether they want to, whether it is right for them. because of the cuts in the loss of the connections and most parts of the u.k. due to the cuts it is going to hinder their choice to decide whether they want to stay or not. of. [applause] >> someone from northern ireland. the young man here has been patiently waiting. >> alex easton from east belfast in northern ireland.

i think it is an absolute disgrace that people are sitting here to say that i should be dictated to and told i have to leave school at 18. if i want to leave school at 16 i should be entitled to prepare if you raise the age to 18, how long until they risa to 21 and the tuition fees thing, what is going to happen to that? we live in a state where we are controlled and watched in the thought of controlling our education even more is an absolute disgrace. thank you. [applause] >> how about somebody from the east midlands? yes, the young woman here from the east midlands. yesterday, you. >> i'm from east midlands. personally i think making the age to 18 will benefit the statistics involved with youth unemployment. but it won't hide the fact that the financial problems young people face. i realize you need a job and you are at college and i am not amazed that any money i get at

the moment is from my parents. and the fact that ama -- people whose parents have a lot less are going to struggle a lot more. so i think that raising the age isn't going to benefit in any way. [applause] >> thank you. somebody from the northwest. hands up from the northwest. what about the young man there with a checkered shirt. to. >> if education is made compulsory for 16 to 18-year-olds, it will be disruptive and more vocational cause will be wasted in a way. this will make the standard of the drop and could affect those who want to be in college. thank you. [applause] >> somebody from the southwest. yes, the woman here with a red

blouse. >> i'm vicki from -- people think in education is not necessary to the employment. for many people education does lead to a better job. to some it doesn't. gordon ramsey for example left school at 16. he is now worth 67 million pounds, much more than most people believe school at 18. staying on at 18, he could've got in 1-800-level. perhaps he could have done free technology learn the same skills that he now has but not as good. it wouldn't have been any good to him. and if he had not stayed in school he would have been in a class full of people who maybe didn't want to learn, may be disrupted the class of people have already mentioned. and that could have ruined his life chances. many young people, staying in

education is essential for them. young people should be given the choice. may be encouraged to stay in encouraged to benefit and improve their life chances but not force. young people desire the choice. [applause] >> thank you. someone from the northeast. what about the young man right at the back? >> tom hunter. i think ladies and gentlemen we are thinking too much of statistics at the moment. i think we need to remember that these are real young people we are talking about. we need to remember that they should have a chance is at the age of 16, you can decide whether not to engage in sexual activity. you can decide whether or not you want to go and fight in the armed forces. why it 16 can you decide whether or not to leave education? we need to make it clear to young people what it is like out there if we are going to send them out at the age of 16, because then if we do change it, if we do raise it to 18, then

they could choose whether or not to stay. so we just need to make sure we give young people the choice because that is the only fair thing to do. thank you. [applause] >> and a further interest from wales? yes, the one -- the young woman there. >> i think we have to acknowledge we have got a problem now in the a lot of young people especially in this room will be finding we do have this problem now with an increase in the number of young people looking to go into university. fewer young people are leaving school at 16 like our parents generation did but this is the problem i think is going to get a lot worse if we choose to raise the leaving compulsory age to 18. i can see that money, which could be a substantial sum, would be put into an extra two years of education could be spent so much more wisely on structured placements up to the

age of 16-year-olds that will not only help those who do choose to leave school at 16 to get a job and move more seamlessly into the world of work but those who then choose actually to stay on until 18 and go through to university to compete that much more easily because i'm sure a lot of you here know experience is the magic word for university of at the moment. [applause] >> the southeast. whoever got from the southeast? yes, the young woman here who has been standing several times. >> thank you mr. speaker. melissa cham from southeast england. i feel personally, i am sure all of you have been aware of the troublemakers in the class of people who can't wait to get their gs at sea over with. i've always felt a anoints believe that people who want to carry on their education will do so i'm not necessarily a holiday regardless but an academic such

as master english or maybe go into performing arts. there are apprenticeships, there were placements and where we can fund the extra money into more education for 16 to 18-year-olds instead of making it mandatory, making it optional. so if you do want to go into education after your gcse, you know you have the security and support. if you don't want to necessarily go to college you might want to do in a partnership than you think i would love to become a plumber or a carpenter at how do i go about doing that? so, thank you. [applause] >> i'm afraid we have run out of time for speeches. just before i called the person who will conclude the debate, i would like to refer to another row or colleagues who has just entered the chamber and i am referring to the member for west

ambassador. j. simpson, give us a way. [applause] it is a particular pleasure to mention joe for two reasons. if memory serves make correctly when she came into the house of commons at the age of 25 she was the youngest member in her intake, and secondly, she has been a champion of youth centers, youth participation in youth empowerment from the moments he set foot in the house of commons. is absolutely right and drop or she should be here today and i think we will take an example from her. [applause] so, thank you once again for some first-class speeches with different opinions and sincerely expressed with real knowledge and fluency and passion. i think all of us today who said in the house of commons on a daily basis are incredibly impressed by what we occurred. to conclude the debate i call

ms. holly maddy on the. [applause] >> thank you mr. speaker. my name is holly and i'm from the youth council. do i hear you ask yourself what job opportunities are available to you? should you be educated until 18? are you competing for jobs with people more experienced and qualified than you are? this is extremely common in our current economic climate. will race in the school and training leaving age to 18 solve youth unemployment and fix these problems? 71% of young people already say say -- stay in education until they are 18 but it is a 29% we need to consider today. those of you who are academic, you can go on to higher education, but just take a

moment to think of those who are not like you, those who struggle with education or maybe who don't understand the level. by increasing the inventory h. immediately will this give the government time to reduce the current unemployment figures? in two years time imagine this. one, and even higher number of people competing for university spaces. how many jobs are there to accommodate the number of graduates? two the qualifications that don't include practical skills required, could they not have been getting this experience in the previous two years? unemployment is higher amongst young people aged 19 to 25. what unemployment levels reduced significantly enough to warrant spending 60 million pounds annually on 16 to 18-year-olds? that we not just witnessed the biggest cuts to public spending in living memory? keeping young people in

education will give them the opportunity to experience mulled zabul were placements empowering them to make informed career decisions. if you were to leave at 16, would work experience be more beneficial from the age of 14 before you choose your subject? or if we were to wait until 18, could there be a focus on work experience for all students, academic or not, or would this be too late to influence our way of thinking? either way, more work experience will create ambition amongst young people today. so the motion we are faced today with is should the school and education leaving age be raised to 18 immediately in order to over youth unemployment? is it guaranteed that unemployment levels will reduce? i have come here today with my long-winded speech padded out with statistics. i sound like a politician, this is not about you and i debating in the house of commons although we may enjoy it. this is about young people's

lives. those in university and those on street corners. jobs are vital to create self-esteem, confidence, optimism and a positive approach to life in general. there are two simple sides to this. yes, or no. if we say yes, raise it to 18, the unemployment figures will decrease, but they are just figures, just numbers and just statistics. will those young people be happy? will they be getting the education that they need? and is it affordable? uniform costs, equipment, school dinners. are they going to be given more opportunities for work experience and will they feel more prepared for the working world? the other side is to stay at 16. unemployment figures know they will not alter, but young people will have a choice just as you you -- united nations for the rights of the child states we should have. will young people be happier?

did they know what they want at 16? is it stereotypical of us to ask are they bored hanging around on the street corners? committing crime, or is this just reality? bearing in mind that those are the young people that will be competing for jobs with university graduates. remember that 29%. the decisions we make here today, guess they are important, but how the politicians respond to what we have said, what we have voted on, will be the life changing for the generation of young people. [applause] >> thank you holly for rounding off in such. that concludes the morning session of our sitting. the youth parliament will now adjourned until 1:30 and i invite everyone to return in a moment to westminster hall for

lunch. however because we started late, we are a little behind schedule and lunch will have to be truncated somewhat. can i just just therefore emphasize to people to be back by 1:30 when we must start or afternoon session. you do you need to start coming back from westminster hall at 1:15 so a very brief lunch and then we will continue. thank you. you have acquitted yourself with great ?