Young People and Work: Milburn Interim Report

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd November 2026 Westminster Hall

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms McVey. I congratulate the hon. Member for Wrexham (Andrew Ranger) on securing the debate. I thank all Members who have contributed, including the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne), who referred to the thoughts of even the most zealous right-wingers. I am not sure where I sit on his zealot-o-meter, but perhaps we will see by the end of my speech—I am sure I will wear it with pride. It is great to be shadowing the Minister; it is always wonderful to debate a fellow Boltonian.

The issues raised by the interim report are made all the more topical by the delay in publishing the final report and by last week’s Budget, which was notable for the absence of any action on the number of young people not in education, employment or training. Alongside the Budget, the Office for Budget Responsibility published a figure that should give every Member pause. Over this Parliament, the Government will spend £911 billion on working-age welfare. That is more than £48,000 for every one of Britain’s more than 18 million working households.

There are few subjects this House debates that matter more to the future of our country. Behind every figure in Alan Milburn’s interim report is a young person whose working life is either not starting well or not starting at all.

[Jim Shannon]

In my contribution I highlighted the issue for young people with mental health issues. That the percentage of those affected went up from 21% to 35% is an indication of a special issue for young people today. The hon. Gentleman will know that through his own constituency, as I do through mine. Does he agree that young people’s mental health must be a priority and that we must focus on them to ensure that they get the employment and the purpose in life that they need?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Snowden]

Speaking of badges of honour, it is always a badge of honour to be intervened on by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I totally agree with his point.

The figures that I just referred to are stark. Youth unemployment reached 15.6% in the first quarter of this year—that is 715,000 young people and 139,000 more than when this Labour Government came to office. Almost a million young people—981,000—are not in education, employment or training. Our youth unemployment rate is now higher than that of Hungary, Slovenia and Bulgaria. Perhaps the most telling finding of all is that six in 10 young people without a job have never worked. For them, this is not about getting back into work; it is about getting a start in the first place.

The Opposition welcome the review and recognise much of its diagnosis. Work is not just a wage; it brings structure, confidence and purpose. Prolonged unemployment early in life leaves a scar on earnings, health and life chances that can last for decades. In Government, the Conservatives understood that. It was a Conservative Government that introduced the kickstart scheme during the pandemic, helping more than 150,000 young people into paid work. It was a Conservative Government that introduced the apprenticeship levy and supported millions of apprenticeship starts. We acted because we knew that the first job matters most. It teaches the value of punctuality and the necessity of taking instructions and it builds social skills in a personal setting.

Since the election, this Government have had more than two years to get to grips with post-covid youth unemployment and the rising cost of welfare. Instead, we have seen a culture of dither, delay and U-turn.

[Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)]

Does the hon. Member agree that making it easier for young people to get functional skills qualifications, rather than being stuck in an endless cycle of resits, would allow them to get those qualifications and then on to an apprenticeship and into work, exactly as those at the Aspire youth hub in Witney do so well?

[Mr Snowden]

Tailored support is something that I will come on to shortly.

Worse still, the Government’s own choices have made the problem harder. The rise in employer national insurance and the new burdens of the Employment Rights Act 2025 have made it more expensive and risky to take a chance on a young person. The Government cannot tax the first rung of the ladder and then express surprise that fewer young people are climbing it.

At the same time, spending on personal independence payments for 16 to 24-year-olds has risen from £1.3 billion to £3.2 billion in five years. Some 45% of young people who are NEET now report a disability, and of those who fall out of work or study through ill health, eight in 10 are still NEET two years later. New analysis from the TaxPayers’ Alliance shows just how deep that runs. In April this year, more than two thirds of universal credit claimants in their twenties—some 870,000 young people—were not in work. In just two years PIP claims rose by almost a quarter among 20 to 29-year-olds and by nearly as much among 16 to 19-year-olds. These are not numbers to be managed; they are young lives being put on hold.

The Minister for Social Security and Disability at the DWP has told us that PIP is “not fit for purpose” yet he also said that the current level of spending is not “of great concern.” The House is entitled to know which of those statements accurately reflects the Government’s position. Nor is it reassuring that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is reported to have written to Peter Mandelson:

“Every meeting I have is ‘who can we tax in order to pay benefits to others’”.

All of this raises some simple but urgent questions for this Government that I would like to put to the Minister. First, will she confirm exactly when Milburn’s final report will be published and when the Government will respond to it in full? Will the Minister also explain why neither the Milburn review nor the Timms review was allowed to report before the Budget? Secondly, will she set out precisely how those two reviews will be brought together? Will there be a single package of welfare reform and when will it come before the House? Thirdly, does the Minister accept that the rise in employer national insurance has reduced entry-level hiring?

[Alex McIntyre]

I wonder if the hon. Gentleman might remind the House how much employer national insurance contributions are for an under 21-year-old earning less than £50,000 a year.

[Mr Snowden]

That is precisely why the Conservative party has pledged to reduce them by 50% to take them down even further.

[Alex McIntyre]

Fifty per cent of nothing is still nothing.

[Mr Snowden]

We are talking about 21 to 24-year-olds.

Fourthly, on the youth guarantee and youth jobs grant, how many young people have actually started a job so far? What is the cost per place and how many remain in unsubsidised work once the subsidy ends? Fifthly, how many apprenticeship starts have there been for those aged 25 since the growth skills levy replaced the apprenticeship levy and how does that compare with the year before?

Finally, will the Government at last accept the offer made by the Leader of the Opposition, repeated at Prime Minister’s questions in June, to work with us on serious welfare reform? That offer stands because we have a plan. Our get to work scheme rests on a simple principle: no young person who can work should leave education and drift straight on to benefits. Every young person would have a dedicated get to work manager and work requirements from day one. It would cost a net £303 million, paid for by streamlining existing employment schemes and as part of the broader £36 billion of welfare savings set out by the shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Faversham and Mid Kent (Helen Whately).

We all share the objective of giving every young person the dignity and opportunity of work, but good intentions are not good enough and another review is not a plan. A working age welfare bill of £911 billion in a single Parliament is not the mark of a system that works; it is the mark of one that is failing both the young people trapped in it and the working families who pay for it. I press the Government for straight answers today: when will they act, how will they pay for it and how will they measure success?

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Monday 12th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

We welcome the new shadow Minister, Andrew Snowden.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

Labour has been talking up the Milburn report for months, and the Treasury is so pleased with the report that it has delayed it until after the Budget, which means it is not going to be good news for taxpayers or the bond market. While the Government dither and delay, we have published our plan for tough love on youth unemployment: support from day one to get back into work, and after six months, those who can work but won’t work will have their benefits cut. I am sure the Chancellor of the Exchequer would welcome our cost-cutting plan in the Budget, so can the Secretary of State explain why the Treasury does not want his plan in the Budget?

[Pat McFadden]

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the Chancellor’s speech at our party conference a couple of weeks ago, in which he was quite clear that we owe young people not just an income, but a future too. That is why the Government are behind the agenda I am setting out. I look forward to reading Alan Milburn’s final report in a few weeks’ time, and I remind the shadow Minister and everyone on the Opposition Benches that Alan Milburn was clear in his interim report that the problems we are talking about are deep-seated, long-term and have existed in this country for a great many years.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Monday 27th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sir Stephen Timms]

I point the hon. Gentleman to the Keep Britain Working review, which Sir Charlie Mayfield is leading; it addresses exactly the issue that he rightly raises. We are also looking at reforming Disability Confident, which has huge potential—19,000 employers have signed up, I think. There is a lot of enthusiasm on the part of employers. We want to make sure that those who sign up to the scheme then progress up the levels so that Disability Confident makes a really significant difference. I am very hopeful that it will.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

11. What assessment he has made of trends in the level of unemployment.

[The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Pat McFadden)]

The latest unemployment figures published last week show a fall to 4.9% in February, which I am sure the whole House will welcome. Along with growth figures of 0.5% earlier this year, that is more evidence that the economy was heading in the right direction at the beginning of the year. But I have to warn the House that external effects caused by the war in Iran and the rise in energy prices may affect jobs as well as prices in the coming months.

[Mr Snowden]

Fylde’s stunning coastline and countryside mean that the hospitality, tourism and leisure industry is at the heart of our local economy. But I have met many businesses that, following the changes to national insurance, have let go so many young people from that industry and are simply not taking on new seasonal staff. Could the Secretary of State update the House on the current trends of unemployment among 18 to 24-year-olds?

[Pat McFadden]

I recently joined a successful jobs fair close to the hon. Gentleman’s constituency, where the industries that he mentioned were hiring more people—it was one of the most successful such events that we have seen. I hope that he will welcome the fact that 330,000 more people are in work this year than at this time last year. When it comes to young people, he will of course know that there is a national insurance exemption for employees under 21.

Fuel Duty

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Wednesday 18th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)]

I thank the right hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay (Mr Holden) for bringing forward this debate. It is a really important one because the impact of fuel costs—both for motorists and for those having to heat their homes—is devastating.

Over the past three weeks, people’s entire ability to budget to be able to afford to live, to buy food and to pay the rent or the mortgage has changed. It has been turned on its head. In every city, town and village in our country, everybody is affected one way or another. I do not mean to diminish the impact of fuel price increases in our cities, which has been huge; nevertheless, for people living in a city, the chances are that they work in the same city, and the chances are also that they can, if need be, leave their car at home, if they have one, and take advantage of public transport. I am very supportive of a cap on bus fares—I wish we still had a £2 cap, but the £3 cap is still a lot better than what we had in the past—but they are a fat lot of good if there is no bus to get on at all.

In rural communities like mine, people on the most modest of incomes have to own a car in order to access our economy or any kind of life at all. Somone living in Kendal might work in Grange-over-Sands, or vice versa; someone living in Ambleside might work in Barrow, or vice versa; someone living in Kirkby Stephen might have to travel 60 miles every day to go and work in the hospitality and tourism industry in Windermere or Bowness. The impact of the fuel price rises over the past three weeks is utterly devastating for these people. Diesel in Cumbria is 160p a litre—up to 170p in some cases—and petrol is near to 140p a litre. Indeed, red diesel is passing the £1 mark for the first time.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

Like the hon. Gentleman, I am a north-west MP representing a rural constituency. Even those of our constituents who work in big suburban areas like Manchester and elsewhere still need to get to a train station, so even those who spend significant time in larger urban areas still rely on their car to be able to get to what resembles public transport to commute to and from work.

[Tim Farron]

The hon. Gentleman makes a very good point. That will be the case across my communities, too; many people will drive to Penrith, Oxenholme, Grange-over-Sands or Windermere to park and then catch the train to their place of work or study. These are significant costs. Of course, it is worth bearing in mind that these fuel costs will also have a significant impact on public transport providers down the line, and will make it hard for them to continue their current services. The hon. Gentleman’s point was well made and well delivered.

We are talking about motor fuel costs rising, but there is also the impact, as has been mentioned already by hon. Members, on heating oil. The costs for people heating and running their homes have been immense and are causing real hardship already. In Cumbria, 46,000 homes are off-grid. About 35% of the homes in my constituency are off-grid, with people relying on heating oil; in Kirkby Stephen, Tebay and Brough, 74% of properties are off-grid, while in Hawksford, it is almost 80%.

I asked my constituents—many of them did not need asking, I have to say—to give me their impressions and experiences of the past few weeks. It is clear that heating oil has literally doubled in price overnight, although I have heard reports of it trebling, too. Many of my constituents cannot afford to get any more heating oil until or unless the prices drop.

It is important to remember that in a community like mine, 25% of our housing stock was built before the turn of the 20th century. This is true of many colleagues’ constituencies as well. Many properties are solid wall properties, which are very difficult or expensive to insulate—a problem that this and previous Governments have failed to deal with adequately. People are therefore spending a fortune heating their difficult-to-insulate homes, and are now in a situation where they are having to spend up to three times more just to keep their homes vaguely warm.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Monday 17th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sir Stephen Timms]

My hon. Friend is right. Our manifesto has a firm commitment that the views and voices of disabled people should be at the heart of everything that we do. Over the past week I have had discussions with a number of disabled people’s fora. When we come forward with our proposals shortly, we will consult extensively with disabled people and their organisations about the right way forward.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

The Government announced billions of cuts to the Department; then, over recent days, Ministers have made U-turn after U-turn, and in the media round over the weekend were spinning out of control. Is there anything meaningful left to announce from the Secretary of State’s original welfare plans?

[Liz Kendall]

The Conservative party, which left a broken welfare system that is failing the people who depend on it and taxpayers, had 14 years to put it right. We know what their legacy is. Hon. Members will see the proposals soon, but we will not shy away from the decisions that we believe are right to give opportunities to people who can work, security for those who cannot, and to get the welfare bill on a sustainable footing.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Torsten Bell]

I have heard the hon. Gentleman’s comment and will raise it with the responsible Minister in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, but it is important that all pensioners who are entitled to support get it. That is what the Government are focused on.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

3. What assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of recent trends in the unemployment rate.

[The Minister for Employment (Alison McGovern)]

Thanks to the dreadful inheritance left to us by the Tory Government, we need to raise productivity, reduce economic inactivity, increase employment rates and drive up economic growth. Our “Get Britain Working” plan sets out how we will progress our ambition of an 80% employment rate, which would place the UK among the highest-performing countries in the world.

[Mr Snowden]

There was some lovely wording in that answer, but the Government appear to be doing absolutely the opposite. Following the Budget, it appears that there is not a week that goes by without another employer announcing significant job cuts. Reed recruitment has already announced that job postings are plummeting. What will the Government do to support the Minister’s Department in the situation it will find itself in—a rapidly increasing number of people looking for jobs and a rapidly decreasing number of jobs being posted because of the Government’s policies?

[Alison McGovern]

I am glad the hon. Gentleman is bothered by the employment rate and I hope he is bothered by the record of his party, which saw employment fall off a cliff after the pandemic and never recover. We were an outlier in that; it did not happen anywhere else in the world. As it is, our jobcentres, which, as we have said, are full of brilliant staff, see just one in six employers ever consider using them to recruit. We will change that. We have a new strategy. The Secretary of State recently announced our plan to ensure that the Department of Work and Pensions serves businesses and that we get the best jobs into jobcentres so that people can take them up, improve their lives and grow our economy.

Oral Answers to Questions

Andrew Snowden Excerpts

Monday 16th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Emma Reynolds]

I thank my hon. Friend for representing the concerns of his constituent. The Department is working closely with the Pensions Regulator. We are looking to gather information on the number of schemes that provide discretionary increases on pre-1997 benefits and those that do not. At the moment, the trustees of those schemes have discretion over the decision to index those benefits.

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

T2. Over the weekend, James Reed, the chief executive of one of the UK’s largest recruiters, said that job vacancies are down 26% compared with the same period last year, which should be a red-light warning that higher unemployment and recession are just around the corner. Will the Secretary of State plead with the Chancellor to reverse the jobs national insurance tax raid that is devastating employment figures before that warning becomes a reality?

[The Minister for Employment (Alison McGovern)]

We still have more than 800,000 vacancies in this economy, and businesses are crying out for staff. That is why, through our reform programme, we are determined that the DWP will serve business better. I look forward to working with Members across the House to make that happen.