MP's hit at board grant
Page 5
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
l'HE ROAD Transport InJustry Training Board was miticised from both sides of he Commons last week for its 'ailure to give financial sup)ort to proprietors who took m apprentices.
Tom Litterick (Labour, SeIly )ak) said there was considerible disappointment among employers such as proprietors who had decided to take on ipprentices in the 3irmingham area, only to dis:over later that the informal .ationing system of funds used )y the Training Board had neant they had not had the inancial support they exected.
This in turn was leading to ncertainty in the employent of young people for raining, added Mr Litterick. John Cope (Con, Gloucesershire South) spoke of the uddle in his area, where mployers promised premium grants for apprentices in the Bristol area were receiving them, while those promised grants in the Gloucester area were not.
John Golding, Under Secretary for Employment, replied that the Board had the money to deal with this problem — and the responsibility.
It was a matter for the Board to determine what grant it should make over and above the Manpower Services Commission's key training grants available to all employers and other grants paid to employers who paid the levy and trained to approved standards.
Dealing with the problem raised by Mr Cope, Mr Golding said this was a question for the Board. But the distinction was that whereas the Board solicited apprenticeships throughout the country, it was only in one area that it actually promised them.