Unemployment, in East Kent, is rising. That means that there are going to be a significant number of young people leaving school this summer who will find it hard, if not impossible, to swiftly obtain jobs.

A worthwhile alternative to employment for a 16 or 18-year-old is, of course, further or higher education or vocational training, and Prime Minister Brown has once again stated that there will be school or college courses for those who need them. When I asked him if his government intended to fully-fund the transport to and from school or college, currently denied to students over 16, he was either unable or unwilling to answer the question and without funding I fear that many potential sixth-formers and trainees will be unable to take advantage of the promised placements.

In mid-August the exam results arrive and hundreds of my young constituents will be looking to the Universities for degree courses. All the signs at present suggest that very many of them will be disappointed.

There will, in 2009 and 2010, be more young people than ever before of university age. This "bulge" has been known about for years but the government has cut by 5000 the number of student places that it had intended to fund. As a result, young people who might have gone to university, those in their early twenties who have wanted to go to university but delayed entry, and those in their 30s and 40s who have never been to university but wish to go back into full-time education, face the prospect of being relegated to the ranks of the long-term unemployed when they could be studying and training for the day when we emerge from recession and need people with degree qualifications.

It costs about £90 million over three years to provide an extra 5000 full-time university courses. The cost of not doing so, and leaving people to claim Job Seekers allowance or other benefits, is about £120 per week per person more! If this is a no-brainer, consider another downside: it looks very much as though there will be a greater shortage of university places in the South than in the North. For those willing and financially able to head beyond Watford to university that may not matter. But for those who have no tradition of higher education in the family, short of cash and unable to travel, the choice is often between living at home and going to the local university college or not going at all. Inevitably, that means that university colleges in areas of high social deprivation, such as East Kent, are likely to find themselves over-subscribed but not funded to meet the demand.

In other European countries faced with budget deficits, governments have applied to the European Investment Bank and have received loans to bridge this gap on behalf of young people needing training and education today in order to contribute to the economy tomorrow. Why has the UK Government not done likewise? I am sure that there is a Labour MP not far from your home that can explain this to you. In the meantime, I shall hope to hear from any of my young constituents who, having gained the appropriate academic qualifications at school, cannot obtain a suitable university place.