Social Mobility: Local Roots, Lasting Change (Social Mobility Policy Committee Report)

Lord Addington Excerpts

Friday 4th September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, this is one of those debates where the report, as the noble Baroness, Lady Manningham-Buller, described, seems to address only certain aspects of the issue. But as she also described, if it did not, we would be here all week. We are looking at key aspects, among which we have concentrated on the rise of the NEET.

We have paid attention to NEETs, and this debate is rather an extension of one I was in yesterday. The rise of the NEET is something that we have identified for over a decade at least. They are a group of people who do not become involved in education or work. Something has happened in our society that makes this possible. Covid undoubtably accelerated the process slightly—it may have even established it—but it was already there. There is something about the way that we are structuring our education and society that is encouraging this group to grow. I hope that we can start to address it properly. We will not do that by repeating the policies of the last decade ad nauseam; we will have to change something.

I always go back to special educational needs and dyslexia, and if the noble Baroness, Lady Manningham-Buller, had a small bet with herself that I would raise it, she has won it. It comes to, as the noble Baroness, Lady Wolf, raised, English and maths. The Latin origin of the word dyslexia—no, it is Greek. Sorry, I did not do classics. The Greek origin of the word translates to a problem with words. It is not; it is a problem with processing, which expresses itself in problems with literacy and reading—more prominently writing than reading, which are two separate skills. Maths is a language, and processing problems can express themselves there.

Many of the solutions we have found are in encouraging and immersing people in the subject. You tend to scan read, so you get a new function. In the modern world, we use technology to produce literature and to communicate. I have not yet met anybody who would object to somebody talking to a computer to get communication going, as opposed to tapping a keyboard. If there is somebody, they probably will be waiting for me at the end of the debate, but I will have very short shrift for them. Please, can we start to establish what is needed with literacy and mathematics? In training and so on, we have found that for all these groups, if you test them on the language or the maths that they are going to use in their career, they do better. Please, can we address that and work it in? The level 1 qualification, which was hinted at by the last Government and now seems to be being implemented, may well be enough for a person to go through the rest of their training. Could we please work that in? Could we make sure that everybody uses a computer all the time?

In the past, I have raised that, in terms of education, the phone in your pocket may be a distraction because of the technology on it. It also can carry assistive technology. It carries voice operation and a calculator. We may have to do other things, but it is there, it fits in your pocket and we all have them with us. I hope that mine has been switched off. We have to start addressing this differently.

When it comes to the process and the system—my noble friend Lady Garden raised this, as she often has before—changing the names of the qualifications may be great, and you may get slightly different qualifications, but let us make sure that they work properly. T-levels had an incredibly bumpy start. Because of the work experience required, there were some courses that nobody finished. V-levels are not as big. Yes, I did find out the figure. It was only one course. The V-level will fit slightly more easily into the existing system, but can we make sure that it works? The BTEC qualification, which has generally been accepted, seems to be the primary target. You are going to get a diverse set of qualifications for a diverse workplace. Even if they have the same name, they will be very different, because they have to be. Can we make sure that we get things that are appropriate and that people have appropriate pathways?

The great engine of social mobility, certainly one that was preached to me, was university. At the moment, universities are getting very bad press. You will get in a big debt with it. There is not much support. The Government are taking steps to make sure that they remain attractive.

However, universities have also become a sacred cow. We all had to get to university, or half of us had to, and we elbowed out levels 4 and 5 HND and NVQ courses. They were devalued by that drive. Newer universities, when they stopped being polytechnics or colleges, tended to push those aside and dump them. Can we encourage universities to take on some of these level 4 and 5 qualifications? Let us bring them all up to the same social status. Many of them were there, and non-graduating courses are an important part of the history of our universities. Can we bring that in to make sure they have the social status and support they need? We need to make sure they are going through.

However, all this is impossible unless you are letting people know what is there, and careers advice is mentioned in the report. It is one of my personal favourites, so I would have liked to see that made a little bigger but hey, you can only do so much. Can we make sure we get this information to the parents or the carers in these groups, because they are the important ones? Some of those we are talking about here may not have people who are engaged in this.

It is about social mobility; if you come from a group which has low attainment in academia, you are less likely to acquire it yourself. You are also less likely to acquire somebody who is pushing you forward to do it. Have the Government given any thought to how you get people to engage with that advice, or give it properly, to make sure that from a fairly early age you know what the options are?

Age 16 is effectively too late in this context. You have to get somebody who is geared up and prepared to take on that effort, that investment of time, energy and money, to get themselves there, particularly if you do not find it easy or you have extra problems. I refer back to my comments on dyslexia; other special educational needs are available, I am told. Can we make sure that we actually have somebody who knows what is going on, and structures to try to reach people? This is not easy. We are talking about parents who may have found that their own educational experience was something best forgotten. If we can start to do that, much of the work of this Government and the previous ones becomes, shall we say, so much easier. That engagement will lead us to some real results. It is a big ask, but I hope the Minister will give us a positive response and tell us how this is at least being started.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Manningham-Buller (CB)]

I am very grateful for the positive reaction to our report around the House, even if some noble Lords understandably emphasised some slightly different things and where they think the committee has not quite got the emphasis right. I wondered whether, as I am speaking at the end, I would want to challenge anything anybody had said, but actually I think pretty well all the contributions have been helpful, constructive and have supported what we have been trying to say.

This is not surprising. Many noble Lords came into politics or, in my case and others, into public service, to improve the lives of our people. What we were looking at was a tremendous waste: people becoming a drain on the economy rather than contributing to it. I am encouraged today by the number of people across the House who agree that this is of critical importance.

I have to say that I am rather closer to the noble Lord, Lord Addington, than the noble Baroness, Lady Wolf, on maths and English, having had substantial problems passing maths myself. This did not prevent me running a charity that, at the time I left, had a budget of £30 billion—despite my lack of numeracy, not because of my fiscal skills. When 40% of young people fail GCSE maths and English, we must have a slightly different approach. That is not to say that these skills are not very important, and we must have high expectations of people rather than dumb down, but we need to think of different ways of doing it.

I welcome what the Government are saying. Those of us on the committee and others will watch and hope and challenge. I will end with the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Young of Cookham: please loosen the apron strings. It is not just delivery locally, or money and power; it is also encouraging local freedom on policy, because that is where we felt the change would come.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

Before the noble Baroness sits down, I must apologise to the House. I forgot to declare my interest as chair of Microlink plc, which deals in assistive technology.

Motion agreed.

Sport: Cricket

Lord Addington Excerpts

Tuesday 19th October 2010 Lords Chamber

[Lord Shutt of Greetland]

I agree that what I have seen set out about the anti-corruption and security unit of the International Cricket Council is pretty robust. In the end, it is up to the cricket authorities to decide what should happen if allegations are proved. I have made my inquiries as to what it amounts to. At the moment, there is a player education programme run by the ICC. It is one day long, and it covers the current rules, the penalties, the processes involved and how corrupters may seek to groom from an early age. It is letting folk know what is involved. After last week's board meeting, it has been decided that that programme is to be further enhanced.

[Lord Addington]

My Lords—

[Lord Faulkner of Worcester]

My Lords—

[Lord Strathclyde]

My Lords, if the noble Lord will bear with me, I think that it is the turn of this side.

[Lord Addington]

My Lords, will the Government draw attention to the use that can be made of the legalised betting industry for spotting odds and fluctuations? That information should be passed on from this country to other nations, even when they do not have legalised betting.

[Lord Shutt of Greetland]

My Lords, it is incredible how huge an industry sports gambling is. In this country, we have the Gambling Commission, but it has only been going for three years. There is a limit to what we can do in other places, although it is right that in both the gambling and sports authorities there is international co-operation. Clearly, word can be passed. There are many countries where gambling is not legalised—indeed, it is illegal—and yet takes place on a broad basis. It is very difficult to deal in such matters.