Schools and Universities: Language Learning

Baroness Prashar Excerpts

Thursday 8th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Prashar (CB)]

My Lords, I too want to thank the noble Baroness, Lady Coussins, for securing this debate and for her comprehensive and thoughtful introduction. Like others, I admire her perseverance in ensuring that we do not lose sight of the sustainability of language learning in schools and universities.

The economic security and other personal benefits of learning and speaking a second language have already been articulated in this debate, so I will not repeat them. It is clear, however, that we need urgent, concerted and co-ordinated action—from primary schools through to universities and beyond—to address the inadequate, long-standing and worsening supply of language learning and teaching skills needed to meet our future needs. It is also clear is that we need a joined-up and holistic approach that is coherent across education and skills systems. While the Government have ambitious reforms to address teacher shortages, their immigration policies risk undermining them, particularly in regard to MFL and, as we have heard, in maths and physics.

The reduction of the graduate visa route from 24 to 18 months creates a structural barrier to retention where international trainees are most needed. The 18-month limit creates a structural misalignment where international trainees will be forced to leave before completing their two-year early career framework induction, unless their school sponsors them through a skilled worker visa, which many schools are unwilling to do due to the cost and complex process.

International trainees have historically played a vital role in plugging this gap due to under-recruitment at secondary level, where EU-trained teachers once formed a significant proportion of the workforce. This is a serious misalignment. Without aligning the policies, we risk losing valuable talent and wasting public investment. Coherence between Department for Education recruitment targets and Home Office immigration policies is needed to sustain this, particularly in the short term.

Given the shortage of UK language graduates, do the Government have any plans to remove the hurdles, such as increased fee costs, NHS charges, visas and reduced financial support, which trainee language teachers face? Are they planning to introduce visa waivers for teachers, as has been well argued during the course of this debate? We know that, due to the hurdles, it is estimated that half of international trainee teachers leave. Bursaries are there, but they are not much use if other hurdles act as disincentives. They are, in fact, a waste of investment.

If we do not act now, we risk the collapse of homegrown language teachers. While it is right that in the long term we should be aiming to create our own pipeline, it is important that in the short term we do whatever we can to sustain this sector to help provide a platform on which we can build a long-term strategy.

While we deal with the immediate shortage in order to avert the collapse of language learning and teaching, it is imperative that in the longer term we develop a long-term strategy. It should set out a long-term pipeline of language skills which links to education and economic and diplomatic needs, and gives departments a single framework to work to. Short-term fixes are absolutely essential, but long-term strategies are equally important to obviate the need for short-term fixes in the future.

There are of course other steps that the Government can take. For example, should the Government be raising awareness of the value of language learning for personal growth and cognitive development? I suggest that we might even look at universities providing joint degrees with other subjects, so that we do not have to close language departments. Other suggestions have been made and I very much look forward to the response from the Minister.