To ask the Scottish Executive how many schoolchildren who are currently in the fifth year of secondary schools are, as a result of the cut-off date for eligibility for the Education Maintenance Allowance of 1 March 2004, excluded from the scheme and what the estimated cost is of including all such schoolchildren, broken down by local authority area.
School census data for 2004-05 have not yet been collected. An estimate, based on numbers of pupils in S3 in 2002-03, suggests that approximately 1,200 school pupils are likely to fall into this group across Scotland. We estimate that the cost of extending Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) eligibility to this group would be approximately £1.8 million in the current financial year with full year costs of approximately £2.6 million in the financial year to March 2006. It is not possible accurately to break down this estimated figure by local authority.
We have received a number of representations on extending eligibility for Education Maintenance Allowance payments to S5 pupils who were born before 1 March 1988 and who are still attending school. I understand the circumstances which have given rise to these representations, and therefore we have looked again at the eligibility criteria. After careful consideration we have decided that to do so, while it would address this anomaly, would introduce other anomalies and inequities which would be difficult to justify. It would also risk undermining the policy rationale on which EMAs are based: to encourage pupils from low income families to choose to stay on at school or college beyond the point where they reach their official school leaving date.
Were we to extend eligibility to all 16-year-olds who entered S5 in August this year we would highlight the ineligibility of 16-year-olds who were in S5 year last year and, in particular, those whose birthdays fall between 1 October and the last day of February. The parents of these pupils might argue that their 16-year-old children should be eligible regardless of their year of study in the same way that the parents of pupils born before 1 March 1988 argue that their children in S5 should be eligible regardless of age. The only way to satisfy both positions would be to extend eligibility to all pupils regardless of age or year of study, which would mean rolling out the EMA programme to all pupils in the current academic year. This would have considerable financial implications.
A distinctive feature of the EMA programme in Scotland is that it reflects thefact that we have two school leaving dates: at Christmas and at the end of the academic year. Pupils whose 16th birthday falls between 1 October and the last day of February are eligible to leave school at Christmas and will, therefore, be eligible to apply for EMA support from January rather than waiting until the start of the next academic year. Those students whose 16th birthday fell before 1 March 2004 were eligible to leave school at Christmas 2003 and, therefore, have already taken the decision to remain in post-compulsory education without the incentive of an EMA. Whilst their decision to remain in post-compulsory education is to be commended, the fact that the students had already made that decision without the incentive of an EMA suggests that we would not be justified in using public funds to extend EMA eligibility to this group.
We have deliberately avoided linking EMA eligibility to year of study. The purpose of the scheme is to provide an incentive to pupils when they reach their official school leaving date and have to make the decision whether or not to stay on at school. The current eligibility criteria support that policy intention and funding is being provided on that basis. We do not, therefore, think that there is sufficient reason to change the eligibility criteria.
It is inevitable when any new scheme is rolled out, that some will fall on the wrong side of the qualifying date. Whilst recognising their disappointment, I considered it fairer to adhere to a date for which there is a rational basis in terms of the policy objective of this scheme.
The aim of the EMA programme is to increase participation and improve retention rates among young people from low income households. Evidence from the first Scottish EMA pilot, and from evaluation of the pilots in England, indicates that the programme is having just such an effect. For example, in East Ayrshire participation has been raised by nearly seven percentage points, the number of pupils leaving school at the Christmas leaving date has reduced and the number progressing to and completing S6 has increased.