My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper and declare interests as co-chair of the APPG on Modern Languages and president of the Chartered Institute of Linguists.
The UK has agreed to work towards association to the Erasmus+ programme, on financial terms to be mutually agreed, which should ensure a fair balance as regards the contributions of and benefits to the UK. Negotiations are under way, and noble Lords will understand that I cannot comment in detail on ongoing negotiations.
I thank the noble Baroness for that encouraging reply and appreciate that she cannot go into negotiating detail. Can she at least clarify that the overall objective is to achieve associate membership by the start of the next funding round, in 2027-28, and that the UK aims to include eligibility for schools, as well as for students in higher education? The international experience provided by Erasmus significantly enhances future employability as well as language skills.
My Lords, we are considering possible timelines for the UK’s association as part of ongoing discussions, including whether association for 2027-28 is feasible, although timelines are extremely tight. To use Civil Service language, we are moving at pace. We will bring forward the final agreement of any negotiations to your Lordships’ House in the usual way, and that will include details about schools and students.
My Lords, I declare my interest as a visiting professor at King’s and chairman of FutureLearn. I strongly welcome the Government’s efforts to associate with Erasmus. EU student numbers in the UK have roughly halved over recent years and now face further challenging policy headwinds under this Government. What assessment has the Minister made of the impact on EU students in the UK of the Government’s plans to impose a further 6% tax on international student tuition fees?
The noble Lord raises an interesting point which is slightly out of scope of the Question, so he will have to bear with me. I will write to him on the detail of any assessment, as I do not have the information in front of me. The opportunities afforded to us by the current Turing, Taith and SEEP schemes, and potentially with Erasmus, allow us to ensure that our relationship with the EU, as our largest trading partner, and the cultural ties that are afforded, can be continued. That is incredibly important.
My Lords, I welcome the Minister’s response to the noble Baroness, Lady Coussins, that the Government are working at pace to associate with Erasmus+. I semi-declare an interest, in that I have worked with several students on Erasmus Mundus programmes. Does the Minister understand the importance of getting in at the start of the multi-annual financial framework? Year-by-year arrangements do not necessarily work. To fully plug into the Erasmus programmes, it would be ideal to be there at the start of the next EU multi-annual financial framework.
The noble Baroness raises a very important point about our ongoing relationship with the European Union as part of these negotiations. Having committed to undertake negotiations to join Erasmus+ in 2027-28, we therefore hope to be part of the full MFF going forward.
My Lords, the Minister says that she cannot go into details, but will she be asking for UK citizens to be afforded the fullest breadth of opportunities—meaning opportunities not just for students but for teachers in terms of their professional development abroad? That was extremely valuable when we were previously a member of Erasmus+.
The noble Earl raises the most important point. Currently, 60% of our schools are struggling to recruit modern foreign language teachers. There is a genuine issue about how we ensure that not just students but their teachers and supporting staff have opportunities in this space. That is one of the benefits of us rejoining the Erasmus scheme, and as part of our negotiations, we will seek to ensure the fullest opportunities, including in respect of staffing.
My Lords, is not the Government’s attitude towards Erasmus and similar excellent schemes an example of the timidity shown by all Governments for many years in response to proposal that students be brought into the Europeanising process? All vice-chancellors across the land would say that Erasmus has brought in extraordinary intellectual and cultural stimulation. Furthermore, the economies of towns where Erasmus schemes are in operation have benefited. Will the Government throw off the shackles of timidity and show enthusiasm for a wonderful scheme that has enriched the world?
My Lords, very few people would ever call me timid. I think it fair to say that it is for exactly the reasons my noble friend has outlined that we are seeking to move at pace to ensure that we can participate in Erasmus in 2027–28. It has notable benefits, and we look forward to making sure that we deliver a fair deal financially with our participation, but also that the people who may benefit from the scheme can do so as quickly as possible.
My Lords, while discussions continue with the European Union “at pace” on the prospect of rejoining or aligning with Erasmus+—and while I appreciate that the Minister did refer to the Turing scheme—can she confirm that the Government will remain fully committed to the Turing scheme, which was established by the previous Administration, and to continuing the excellent work it does in widening access for students to study not just in the EU but in the rest of the world?
The Turing scheme, the Taith scheme and the SEEP schemes have provided wonderful opportunities for many young people. The noble Baroness will not be surprised to hear that I wanted to know how many people from the Potteries have participated: 200, in case noble Lords are interested. It is incredibly important that we make sure there is no gap and that we look at all these schemes in the round. Obviously, once negotiations—which are currently active—have been held, both on this and on the youth mobility scheme we will be discussing next week, there will be full disclosure to your Lordships’ House so we can discuss in the usual way what happens next.
My Lords, “at pace”, as we know, does not seem to have a timeline. We must note that many cohorts of young people have already missed out on these schemes. Do the Government not recognise that those in their mid-20s to late 20s do not have those opportunities to look forward to? What will this Government give to them?