the ALP (Association of Learning Providers) said: “Take away their £30 a week and the chances of keeping some of the teenagers who receive it enthused enough to attend school or college are slim”
Shane Chowen vice-president (further education) of the NUS (National Union of Students) said: “The plan to abolish the EMA will be devastating news to thousands of young people who rely on that support to complete their post-16 education. The government is still calling it an “incentive”, when in reality it is a vital source of support for young people from low-income families. Another big worry is the loss of funding for level 2 (GCSE-equivalent) qualifications for over-25s, which means those who were failed by the education system the first time round won’t get a second chance unless they have the money to pay for it.”
Chris Morecroft, president of the AoC, said: “One area where the Government has got it seriously wrong is the decision to abolish the EMA. You all know, as do the people actually working in colleges, that EMAs have made a real difference in recruiting and retaining young people in education and training and helping them to be successful. AoC has been quite clear with ministers that their ambition to achieve full participation in education and training to the age of 18 by 2015 will not succeed unless young people have the financial security to participate. And that they have made it much more difficult to reduce the number of young people not in education, employment or training.”
It is clearly apparent that many people are worried about the future of our younger generations. Colleges are particularly concerned about EMA because they teach 69 per cent of students receiving this support. In some cases, such as Joseph Chamberlain Sixth Form College in Birmingham, more than three quarters of students come from families earning under £20,000, and are eligible for the maximum grant. The coalition government have said that EMA is not required as 90% would still stay in further education whether they received it or not. However, recent studies have shown that, if EMA is abolished , at least 76,000 young people would be forced out of further education and would become NEETs (Not in Education, Employment or Training). It can easily be argued that the additional cost of paying welfare benefits to these people would far outweigh any savings made from abolishing it. EMA makes it far easier for 16/18 year olds to stay in education and focus on their studies. It should be considered a down payment on the economic prosperity of our country as it helps develop a motivated and highly skilled workforce for the future.
To view all related links to this article, please click here