(1 week, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberI congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Sussex (Alison Bennett) on securing a debate on this important subject. I will endeavour to respond to as many of the points as possible.
Since taking on the role of Minister for Skills, my noble Friend in the other place has met many of our amazing teachers, support staff and leaders in the further education sector, including our sixth-form college sector. I thank all those people for the excellent work that they do, day in and day out. Alongside schools, FE colleges and other FE providers, sixth-form colleges play a vital role in transforming the lives of our young people, breaking down their barriers to opportunity and ensuring they can progress into further training, higher education and higher-quality careers. This is central to our mission of delivering economic growth, ensuring and enabling success not just for individuals but for our communities, our companies and our country. Colleges, teachers, technicians, and everyone who supports students are important to us, and this Government will treat them with the value and respect they deserve.
The Government believe—as Labour Governments always do—that education is about opportunity, and that the role of government is to extend opportunity to young people from every background and every corner of this country. The Government’s commitment to the education of young people was plain to see in our Chancellor’s Budget announcement of an additional £300 million for further education, to ensure young people are gaining the education and skills that they and this country need.
Our fantastic sixth-form colleges will benefit from that increase, and we announced on Friday that we are making approximately £15 million of that funding available to sixth-form colleges and general FE colleges for April to July 2025. This one-off grant will enable colleges to respond to current priorities and challenges, including workforce recruitment and retention. The remaining funding will be made available in 16-to-19 funding rates for the academic year 2025-26, with the aim of ensuring that all 16-to-19 providers are funded on an equitable basis from 2025 to 2026. This was in the context of a very challenging fiscal landscape, and it demonstrates the value we place on further education.
I do of course acknowledge the challenges that sixth-form colleges and their teachers face, and the concerns about the disparity with schoolteachers following the schoolteachers pay award in July. The schoolteachers award was made in line with the recommendations of the independent School Teachers Review Body. However, pay in the FE sector, including in sixth-form colleges, is a matter for colleges themselves, not the Government. Colleges are able to base pay on their specific needs and are not bound by the schoolteachers pay award or related terms and conditions.
As Members will know, FE colleges, including sixth-form colleges, were incorporated under the terms of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992, which gave them autonomy over the pay and the contractual terms and conditions of their staff. On the six-day strike action that had taken place in this academic year, I know that both sixth-form college teachers and leaders are always concerned to ensure that the impact on young people is minimised as far as possible, and I acknowledge the information that the hon. Lady has shared about some of those students’ experiences.
As I have said, I know that both sixth-form college teachers and leaders are always concerned about the impact on young people. Some of their arrangements include providing online learning where possible, and keeping libraries and learning centres open to allow for independent study. I know that both sixth-form college teachers and leaders will continue to consider and mitigate the impact of strikes on young people during the course of any industrial action. We encourage open and constructive dialogue by all parties in the best interests of staff and students. We all have the shared goal of ensuring that our young people gain the very best education during this critical transition period.
Our great FE teachers play a critical role in the lives of young people. We know that high-quality teaching generates high-quality outcomes for learners, and this is why we need more great FE teachers, including in critical subject areas. After a decade in which education was far from the heart of Government thinking, the new Labour Government are bringing about change at pace. It is for this reason that we are committed to recruiting 6,500 new expert teachers across our schools—both mainstream and specialist—and colleges over the course of this Parliament.
Our measures will include getting more teachers into skills shortage subjects, supporting areas that face recruitment challenges and tackling retention issues. We have begun to make good early progress towards this key pledge. We have already rolled out our targeted retention incentive to teachers in further education, including sixth-form colleges, to boost recruitment and retention. For the first time, this gives eligible early career FE teachers in key STEM—science, technology, engineering and maths—and technical shortage subjects up to £6,000 after tax annually on top of their normal pay. In addition, the Taking Teaching Further programme makes it easier for providers to recruit and retain those with relevant industry knowledge by providing early career support to help their transition into teaching. We also continue to support recruitment and retention with teacher training bursaries worth up to £30,000, tax-free, in certain key subject areas.
This is a huge problem in my constituency. Between Sparsholt agricultural college, which provides specialist training, as has just been mentioned, and Peter Symonds sixth-form college, which is one of the biggest sixth-form colleges in the country, a total of almost 9,000 students are affected by this pay disparity and the resulting dispute just in my constituency alone. Does the Minister agree that the Government need to start viewing education as an investment not just in our young people, but to grow the economy, not purely as a cost to be cut, which seems to have been the case over the last few years?
I thank the hon. Member for mentioning those 9,000-plus students from his area. This Government are interested in and passionate about breaking down the barriers that prevent young people from progressing and, with one in eight young people not in training, education or employment, we recognise the need to give young people the skills and training that they need, and support into employment. That is one of the key focuses and missions of this Government, and we are totally committed to it.
The national further education teacher recruitment campaign is raising awareness and consideration of careers in FE. To find out more and plan next steps, it encourages people to visit the website Teach in FE, which received more than 450,000 visits in 2023-24. We are committed to ensuring that we recruit and retain more teachers across schools and colleges in our country. We are taking those steps to ensure that we attract and retain high-quality teachers across our schools and colleges, which forms part of our aim to create a clear, flexible high-quality skills system that supports people of all ages, breaking down barriers to opportunity and driving economic growth.
We have established Skills England to ensure that we have the highly trained workforce needed to deliver the national, regional and local skills needs of the next decade, aligned with the upcoming industrial strategy. Skills England will work closely with employers, unions, Departments, local organisations and other agencies. Skills England will ensure that the skills system is clear for employers and delivers the training that they need. It will play a key role in supporting the skilled workforce needed to deliver the Government’s five missions: driving economic growth; breaking down barriers to opportunity; supporting our NHS; safer streets; and our clean energy transition. That links to our commitment to 1.5 million more homes, and seizes the opportunity of net zero to create hundreds of thousands of good jobs. Skills England will ensure that the skills system is clear for individuals, including young people and older adults, strengthening career pathways into jobs across the economy. The Government’s dedication to skills reflects the utmost importance that we place on transforming lives and the economy.
I thank the hon. Member for Mid Sussex for securing this debate on such a vital matter, and I thank other Members for their contributions. I reiterate my thanks to the wonderful teachers and leaders who make such a difference to the prospects of our young people. This debate has given me the opportunity to talk about our plans for post-16 education and skills, which are essential for breaking down the barriers to opportunity and for the country’s economic growth. The additional £300 million of funding for FE, as well as the targeted retention incentive, teacher training bursaries, the taking teaching further programme and our teach in FE campaign, demonstrate the value we place on the FE workforce, including our excellent teachers and leaders in sixth-form colleges. I pay tribute to the transformative work that FE staff do day in, day out.
High-quality teaching is one of the biggest influences in positive learner outcomes, providing learners with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed. I am sure that we will continue to discuss skills and 16 to 18-year-old education in the coming months, because the Government recognise the importance of improving prospects for young people and how that links to our plans to drive economic growth. FE teachers are and will remain central to those plans.
Question put and agreed to.
(1 month ago)
Written CorrectionsI am minded of that old adage—I suppose I am old enough to remember all these things—that when you ask a fish to climb a tree, it does not make the fish stupid; it just cannot do it. My concern with the qualification review is that we will not have the breadth of scale that allows for student choice and accessibility, and it will try to pinpoint people into roles that they cannot be successful in. How can the Minister ensure that those gifted in academia will have that clear path, and those gifted with job skills will find their place as well, alongside those still searching for their calling who are looking for wide subjects to keep many doors open for their future?
We are keeping 157 of the courses that were outlined to be defunded. That will be reviewed on an ongoing basis depending on uptake. Our focus is very much on economic growth, and our mission is for growth and ensuring that young people have opportunities in T-levels and other qualifications to ensure that they are able to get the jobs that are desperately needed in our country. We are not removing the rules of combination. More variation should support 16 to 19-year-olds to have access to the jobs they wish to do in the future.
[Official Report, 12 December 2024; Vol. 758, c. 1088.]
Written correction submitted by the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Lewisham East (Janet Daby):
We are keeping 157 of the courses that were outlined to be defunded. That will be reviewed on an ongoing basis depending on uptake. Our focus is very much on economic growth, and our mission is for growth and ensuring that young people have opportunities in T-levels and other qualifications to ensure that they are able to get the jobs that are desperately needed in our country. We are removing the rules of combination. More variation should support 16 to 19-year-olds to have access to the jobs they wish to do in the future.
(1 month ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I will endeavour to do so, Mr Mundell. I am pleased to be speaking in this debate, which, as has already been said, is probably the last education debate this year—what a lovely subject for the final one. I extend my congratulations to the hon. Member for Chichester (Jess Brown-Fuller) on securing it. It was excellent to hear so much about her performing arts background—from teaching to advocating here; she obviously still enjoys it.
I am sure many of us are enjoying creativity during this festive season—maybe hon. Members have been to a pantomime or two, although I am not encouraging anyone to do one here. I look forward to seeing “Sleeping Beauty” in my constituency, and I am sure that many Members who have spoken about the theatres, creative arts and creative places in their areas are enjoying visiting them and partaking in the activity as well. It was excellent and lovely to hear about the many things that colleagues have mentioned, although of course we also heard about the many challenges and the changes that are needed. Hon. Members said that we need to go further, and I know that they will hold the Government to account on our mission statements and reforms.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington) for her contribution, particularly about Sammy’s Foundation, and about the need to ensure that the creative arts are there for people with SEND and those who are neurodiverse.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for speaking about music hubs and the need to review provision for arts and creativity.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Dr Opher) talked about the need to campaign. I very much agree that creativity and the arts help with children’s emotional health and wellbeing—I will be speaking about that later—but it was also lovely to hear that it helps with maths. Why wouldn’t we want to hear that? It is absolutely brilliant.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Tristan Osborne) for talking about not only the worrying decline in the arts but the need to inspire generations to come.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen (Alex Ballinger) for raising concerns about declining GCSE uptake, and for talking about hubs.
My hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham) talked about the missions and growth, as well as SMEs.
It was lovely to hear the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) speak about many things, including how the art of graffiti can make real and positive changes.
The hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) spoke about many relevant things, as she often does, including the need to ensure that the curriculum is rounded, varied and broad—I could not agree more. I am sure that we are all advocating for more fun in our children’s studies and the encouragement of their creative abilities. Learning can be fun, and we hope that it is in our schools.
I am pleased with the many contributions that have been made, and I will endeavour to respond to them in the time I have, but I encourage Members to make contact with me if they feel they have not been answered. The Government recognise the immense value of creative subjects for every child and young person, extending far beyond career aspirations in the creative industries. Creative subjects support a child’s ability to express themselves, help their confidence and support their emotional wellbeing, and there are benefits in many other areas.
Creative subjects, like the arts, music, drama and many others, are significant elements of the rounded and enriching education that the Government want every child to receive. That is why creative subjects are part of the national curriculum for all maintained schools from the age of five to 14—and beyond for drama. Academies, too, are expected to teach these subjects as part of their statutory requirement to foster pupils’ cultural development. Indeed, many schools currently teach creative subjects as part of the curriculum and do so with great success, which enables children and young people to engage with subjects like music beyond the school day. The Government’s goal is to ensure that no child is deprived of the enriching experience that creative education provides. We aim to ensure a consistent approach across all schools.
The Government’s mission is to break down the barriers to opportunities that hold back many of our young people. We know that this will take time, but we are committed to taking the right steps to make it a reality. A crucial step in realising our vision is to ensure that our national curriculum strikes the right balance. It must embody ambition, excellence, relevance, flexibility and inclusivity. That is why in July we launched an independent curriculum and assessment review for ages five to 18, chaired by Professor Becky Francis CBE.
The review will seek to deliver a broader curriculum, with improved access to music, art, sports, drama and vocational subjects. It will look closely at the key challenges to attainment for young people and the barriers that hold children back from the opportunities that they should be able to access. This is an important process, and the recommendations put forward by Professor Becky Francis and her expert-led panel will be published in 2025. Many Members have mentioned that crucial review.
We recognise that although potential is widespread, opportunities are not. That disparity has held many young people back from fulfilling their true potential. To ensure that music education is fully inclusive, including for those with special educational needs and disabilities in both mainstream and special schools, music hubs are required to have an inclusion lead and to develop an inclusion strategy. Furthermore, the Government will launch a new national music education network. This initiative will help families, children and schools access broader opportunities and support.
I really do not have time, I am afraid.
Through the opportunity mission, we will work to break the link between young people’s background and their future success. Our focus is on supporting the most vulnerable and disadvantaged children, and we will continue to take steps to ensure that opportunity is not restricted by a young person’s location or background.
Our goal is to help families continue to support their children in accessing specialist music and dance courses, so we have made changes to the music and dance scheme for this transitional academic year. From January 2025, we will ensure that families with below average incomes receive additional support to prevent any increases in parental contributions due to the VAT change. This adjustment will benefit around half the families with a music and dance scheme bursary for their child.
I would like to give the hon. Member for Chichester some time to respond, so I will end on that note. I thank all Members for their contributions, and I wish everyone a very merry Christmas.
(1 month ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) on securing this important debate. I thank her for speaking so passionately about the importance of apprenticeships as a route into the construction sector and many other vital industries. I will endeavour to respond to all the points she made. I would also like to thank the other Members that have contributed to the debate: my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) and the hon. Members for Strangford (Jim Shannon), Wokingham (Clive Jones), and West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin).
Everyone across this Chamber cares about young people and fully accepts that young people need to be in apprenticeships, where that is suitable for them. If it is right for them, it is also right for getting the economy going and ensuring the growth in our country that we so desperately need. It is right that we put our efforts as a Government towards making sure that young people succeed in this area. However, I would also say that we have inherited a picture that is not as positive as the shadow Minister laid out.
We know that around a third of vacancies in the UK are hard to fill due to a lack of skills in these sectors, with large shortages in construction and information and communications. Skills shortage vacancies make up a significant proportion of all vacancies in construction, information and communications, manufacturing and health and social work. We have actually inherited a picture where many companies and organisations are finding they cannot employ people because they do not have the relevant skills, and we have millions of people that need to be in work that do not have the skills for certain jobs where they could fulfil their potential.
Between 2020 and 2035, the construction industry will need an additional 1,143,000 people in the workforce, in order to take account of additional workers and to replace existing workers. As Members have said, we really do have our work cut out for us.
All Members will recognise the long and proud history of apprenticeships and trades in this country. Apprenticeships in England can be traced back to the middle ages when craft guilds were first established—they are part of our DNA. The first national apprenticeship system of training was introduced as far back as 1563.
Despite that long-standing history, especially in construction, it is concerning that, in recent years, we have seen declining apprenticeship opportunities in vital occupations such as bricklaying, plastering, plumbing and so on, particularly for younger people. It is of great concern that, following reforms of apprenticeships, including the introduction of the apprenticeship levy in 2017, apprenticeship starts by young people under 25 fell by almost 40% according to data published by the Department for Education. It is also concerning that so many workers and employers have told us they find it difficult to access the skills they need, particularly in critical areas such as construction trades.
The UK construction workforce is just over 2 million people, according to the latest figures from the Office for National Statistics. Despite an average of 38,000 vacancies advertised per month, almost a third of construction employers report that finding suitable skilled staff was their key challenge, as I have already mentioned. In addition, our labour market and skills projections suggest that between 2020 and 2035, we will need to work hard to make sure there are more than a million people to replace people in this sector.
We need reform of our skills system so that we are able to meet such demands. That is exactly what this Government are going to do, and have begun to do. It is clear that the skills system is fragmented and has lacked a clear plan, which has resulted in a lack of clarity around which sectors need prioritising and has led to a skills landscape that is confusing to learners and employers.
There has been lots of concern, as has been mentioned, about the drop-out rate of young people in apprenticeships. That is of course very concerning, and there are different reasons for those rates. Surveys have been done and people move on for many reasons, such as other employment or promotion, or finding the apprenticeship difficult. The situation is being reviewed and assessed.
The issues have been compounded by insufficient investment in skills, which has led to a decrease in adult participation in further education and training. To address that, the Government have established Skills England, a new body that will tackle skills shortages and support sustained economic growth. Skills England will help to ensure that the skills system is clear and easy to navigate for young people and adults, strengthening career pathways into jobs across the sector. It will increase the quality and quantity of skills development in the workplace. It will work together with combined authorities and other places with devolution deals, as well as other regional organisations such as employer representative bodies, to ensure that regional and national skills needs are met at all levels—from essential skills to those delivered via higher education, in line with the industrial strategy.
We have also set out plans for a more flexible levy-funded growth and skills offer, building on the current apprenticeship offer. I assure hon. Members that the Government are listening to employers. Employers have told us that the current apprenticeships offer is inflexible and that the system does not work for them. We want to support employers, not only in the trades, but in all sectors, to develop the skills that they need to thrive. That is why we have introduced a more flexible levy-funded growth and skills offer that will provide employers with greater choice.
As a key first step toward greater flexibility, we are introducing new shorter-duration apprenticeships and foundation apprenticeships, as employers have told us that not all roles or all learners need a minimum of 12 months’ training. We are responding to employers who have said that more support is needed to generate a pipeline of talent that can access occupationally specific apprenticeships, and we are exploring the best way in which shorter-duration apprenticeships can better meet the needs of specific sectors such as construction, where occupational competence can be reached in less than the current minimum duration of 12 months, or where individuals have relevant prior learning.
We will, of course, protect the elements that make apprenticeships work so well and ensure that they retain the credibility and prestige they hold with employers. Our new work-based foundation apprenticeships will focus on ensuring that training is directed towards real vacancies. They will provide young people with a broad training offer, with clear and seamless progression into their next opportunity, whether that is the next level of apprenticeship or other valuable occupational learning. We will work closely with employers and providers. The Government will make sure that we get this right.
I thank the Minister for her positivity and for her response to the hon. Member for Portsmouth North. I hope I have not jumped the gun with this point—perhaps the Minister is coming to it. Has she had discussions with those back home in the Northern Ireland Assembly about working together to progress things in a positive way for everyone?
I thank the hon. Member for his intervention and for his earlier speech. We are working with our devolved Administrations and are committed, along with them, to making sure that we get this right for young people. I thank him for his contributions about, and concern for, young people needing to complete their apprenticeships. I am very willing to engage further with him on these conversations.
In addition to the declining numbers of apprenticeship opportunities in recent years, it is also concerning that only around half of apprentices go on to achieve their apprenticeships. The latest available data for the 2022-23 academic year shows that the apprenticeship achievement rate was 54.3%. In the construction sector, the achievement rate was slightly lower, at 52.7%. Although that represents an increase on the previous year, as in so many areas of the skills system, we need to do much more. We all know that apprenticeships, when completed, deliver great outcomes, so it is critical that we work together with employers, learners and providers to make sure that more apprentices achieve. The Government are working hard to deliver that.
There are concerns around the English and maths requirements for apprenticeships, which are sometimes a barrier to completion and achievement. We are looking carefully at this policy to make sure that we set high standards while supporting apprentices to achieve. We will continually improve other areas of apprenticeships, including end-point assessment, to ensure that they are robust yet proportionate and aligned with key professional qualifications. I am clear that this is a partnership, so we will also make sure that employers and providers have the support and challenge that they need to improve by sharing best practice and improving guidance, alongside an inspection and accountability system that drives improvement.
I welcome the work of the Construction Industry Training Board to support construction apprenticeships in key trades, such as bricklaying and carpentry. The CITB, which is sponsored by the Department, provides financial support to both construction employers and learners. Employers can claim £2,500 a year per apprentice while individuals complete their apprenticeship and a £3,500 achievement grant on successful completion of their full apprenticeship. Apprentices that go on to complete their apprenticeships can look forward to wage returns and more secure employment.
I gently remind my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North that the Chancellor set out in the Budget that the apprenticeship minimum wage will increase by 18% from April 2025, from £6.40 to £7.55 per hour. The median annual earnings for apprentices achieving a level 3 apprenticeship in the construction, planning and built environment sector in 2015-16 were £21,730 one year after studying, rising to £29,620 five years later. We will ensure that many more apprentices, including those in key trades, see those benefits in the future.
As my hon. Friend mentioned, small and medium-sized enterprises are a key area of interest. They are a driving force in the construction sector, playing an important role in providing local opportunities to young people, and we provide a range of financial support to help them to take on apprentices. For non-levy paying employers—they are likely to be smaller employers—we pay 100% of the apprenticeship training cost for young apprentices aged 16 to 21. We also provide £1,000 to employers when they take on apprentices aged under 19, in recognition of the additional support that younger apprentices may need when entering the workplace. Employers can choose how best to spend that, and they are not required to pay anything towards employees’ national insurance contributions for apprentices up to the age of 25.
I strongly encourage any young person to consider a rewarding career in the trades, whether that is as an electrician, scaffolder or plasterer. My hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough spoke so passionately about apprenticeships being an excellent entrance to jobs and occupations. It is a brilliant route for young people, and I could not agree with him more. The Government are really ambitious for young people, where it is right for them, to pursue apprenticeships, and it is our job to make sure that we give them every opportunity to do so. This Government are about breaking down barriers and ensuring that young people have those opportunities.
The Government have an ambitious plan for rebuilding Britain. We have committed to building 1.5 million homes in England to ensure that people have access to quality housing, and skilled trades are absolutely necessary if we are going to achieve that target. We are working closely with industry to ensure that we have a skilled workforce to deliver that commitment. Last month, we announced a £140 million package of industry investment to create 32 home building skills hubs in areas that need more housing. The hubs are an example of how sectors can use existing flexibilities to solve skills shortages and support growth. They will make use of existing flexibilities in our apprenticeship system to deliver fast-track home building training and apprenticeships for skills in critical demand for home building, including groundwork, site carpentry and bricklaying. The Government are committed to building on that type of innovation.
I am enormously grateful for the support that my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North has given this agenda today and for all the very significant and relevant contributions. The hon. Member for Wokingham spoke about his local area and the support that is needed. He emphasised the decline in many of the apprenticeships that are needed for young people, and he asked for a meeting. I invite him to write in and I will endeavour to ensure that my noble Friend, Baroness Smith, will have a meeting for that very important discussion.
Hon. Members have raised some important concerns about skills shortages in critical trades, and about the perception of careers in those vital occupations. I am grateful for the considered contributions of everyone who has spoken. It is clear that there are widespread skills shortages in vital industries, such as construction. We will all need to benefit from young people being in those jobs at some point or other in our lives, and it is especially needed for our country when we are looking at growth. I have set out today how we will begin to tackle this issue, starting with the establishment of Skills England and by developing a more flexible and levy-funded growth and skills offer. Those actions will support employers and learners across the country in accessing high-quality skills training.
(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberWith permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will now make a statement on the outcomes of the review of qualifications reform at level 3.
The priority for this Government is to build a skills system that will drive forward opportunity and deliver the growth that our economy needs. The post-16 skills system in England that we inherited from the previous Government fails both of those tests. In particular, the qualifications landscape is too confusing and fails to provide the clear routes to success that is needed by learners and employers. We heard strong arguments that the previous Government’s plans to remove level 3 qualifications and to limit the flexibility for schools and colleges meant that they risked leaving students with too little choice and too few opportunities.
This year, we have paused the defunding of qualifications and have undertaken a review of the qualifications that are set to have their funding removed, to see where we need to retain alternative qualifications, such as applied general qualifications or BTECs, and to consider how long we need to keep them in place. We undertook extensive stakeholder engagement, delving into the detail of qualifications with employer representative bodies, colleges, practitioners, awarding organisations and industry experts.
We recognise that certainty is very important to education providers, to students and to their parents and guardians. I reassure the House that our decisions make the position clear up to 2027. We are clear that students deserve high-quality qualifications that meet their needs, and that we must continue to develop and improve qualifications, so that they provide for the needs of students and employers.
The curriculum and assessment review will take a view on qualifications in the long term, as part of its wider consideration of how we prepare all young people for life and work, but there are some areas where we need to act in advance of its recommendations. The first change that we will make is that we will not tell providers and students which types of qualifications they can and cannot mix together. It should be for colleges and sixth forms to work with students, employers, mayors and higher education to devise the best mix for each individual and deliver the skilled young people that their local economy needs.
We will therefore not be applying the previously proposed rules of combination. There are a confusing number of qualifications in the system, and through this review, we have already identified more than 200 qualifications with low or no enrolments. We will remove funding from these in line with already published dates. This gives students and employers a simpler range of qualifications to choose from.
T-levels provide an excellent qualification option, which should be available to more learners. We introduced three new T-levels this September, and a further T-level in marketing is to be introduced from September 2025. It was fantastic to see the energy generated by this year’s T-levels Week, which highlighted the huge benefits that young people are gaining from T-levels, and their enthusiasm for the qualification. The unique industry placement aspect of T-levels is a real draw for students and is all too often not offered by other qualifications.
We have recently introduced new flexibilities to support industry placement delivery, to enable more young people to benefit from the opportunities that T-levels provide. It follows, therefore, that where learners wish to study a large qualification in a T-level route, the T-level should be the main option for them. We have moved away from blanket restrictions, such as automatically defunding any qualification that overlaps with a T-level. Instead, we have taken a practical, evidence–led approach, looking at the qualifications route by route. This will ensure that we can be confident that students have high-level choices.
On this basis, we have concluded that we will not proceed with defunding qualifications on published lists in agriculture, environment and animal care; legal, finance and accounting; business and administration; and creative and design before 2027. Following our review, we will retain funding for 157 qualifications that were due to be defunded by 31 July 2025.
In engineering and manufacturing, we will keep funding for the qualifications that were previously identified for defunding until 2027. This will allow time to update the occupational standards that are designed by employers and that underpin this large and complex route, and to establish new qualifications that meet the needs of learners, providers and employers.
In the digital sector, we are working with the T-level awarding organisation to make assessments more manageable, and plan to have the necessary changes in place for the next academic year. We are also making T-level placements more flexible, expanding the option for remote learning. This will be particularly important in the digital route. We will keep funding for the six existing large digital qualifications until 2026, to allow time to embed these key improvements. Beyond that, we will also keep funding for 13 smaller digital qualifications, so that learners have a range of choices until reformed alternatives are available.
On health, science and social care, the previous decision to defund social care qualifications left a gap, as there was a heavy T-level focus on health and science, rather than on social care. We will therefore keep funding for nine qualifications in health and social care until new qualifications in the care services route have been developed. We expect that to happen in 2026-27. We are also keeping funding beyond that for 11 qualifications in science-related subjects to give learners even more options.
On education and early years, we have heard strong support for the T-level, and so we will remove funding from existing large and medium qualifications as planned in 2025. This will direct learners who want to study a large qualification to the T-level as the highest-quality option. We are also retaining funding for six smaller qualifications to support specific occupations, such as teaching assistants, giving learners a smaller alternative.
Construction is a key part of this Government’s mission, and I am delighted to report that two of the construction T-levels continue to grow and offer high-quality options for learners. The on-site construction T-level is also providing valuable education, industry experience and a positive route into employment for those who wish take it. However, its success has been limited because of a lack of overall demand for a larger qualification at level 3. We have, as a result, concluded that the needs of learners and the economy are best met through apprenticeships and other classroom provision, and decided to cease taking new enrolments for the on-site construction T-level. Those already taking it will be able to complete it as planned and progress into positive destinations post-graduation.
To meet the economic needs of this important sector and to ensure that we can support our missions around high-quality housing, we are also keeping one large qualification in site carpentry, and in 11 other medium and small qualifications.
We must continue to improve opportunities and the quality of qualifications. We will keep qualifications only until they are no longer needed, so that learners can do the T-levels that they need to do. We will invite awarding organisations to submit further new level 3 qualifications in the spring, to continue the process of reform.
We are currently considering whether proposed T-levels in catering and beauty therapy meet the needs of learners and the economy, and we will update the sector in due course. I can confirm that any new T-level in these areas will not be rolled out until at least 2026.
These changes are a fair reflection of what we have heard, and offer a balanced approach that supports our missions of spreading opportunity and supporting economic growth. We want high-quality options, strong choices and a simpler system that is easier for learners to navigate. The approach and timescales that I have set out today represent a pragmatic and achievable journey to where we want to be. We are putting the needs of learners and our economy at the heart of how we move forward. I commend this statement to the House.
I thank the shadow Minister for his many points. The reason the review was so pertinent and needed to take place was because of the confusion around T-levels and how much work needed to take place—work that the Conservative Government had a lot of time to do. This Government believe that T-levels are an excellent qualification that should be available to more young people. Qualifications that overlap with T-levels will be able to co-exist while we continue to develop and improve qualifications, so that they provide for the needs of learners and employers, and support the transition to T-levels as the large technical qualification of choice. The Conservative Government’s rushed plans would have left young people looking to move into crucial sectors such as engineering or social care without options. Instead of blanket restrictions, the review will deliver on the Government’s ambition to fix the foundations of the economy and deliver growth.
As the shadow Minister mentioned, T-levels are still in the early stage of implementation, and the retention rate is improving. We expect that trend to be maintained as they continue to bed in. Career guidance for potential students is key, and we are raising careers advisers’ awareness of the benefits of T-levels. The shadow Minister will be aware of the announcement in the October Budget of £300 million of additional revenue funding for further education and £300 million of new capital investment. That settlement reaffirms and expands the Government’s commitment to skills by providing an additional £3 million for further education to ensure that young people are developing the skills that the country needs. In addition, the Government have provided £300 million of new funding to support colleges to maintain, improve and ensure the suitability of the FE estate, and address conditions and capacity issues. We will set out in due course how that will be distributed.
There are many areas in which the Government are making advancements, and we are very aware that students need to be supported. Combinations of learning are absolutely the right thing for them. We remain ambitious for students. I will endeavour to get back to the shadow Minister on the terms of reference.
I call the Chair of the Education Committee.
I pay tribute to everyone who works in further education—a vital sector that makes a transformative difference, and whose importance is often not properly recognised. Vocational and technical courses and qualifications are a critical part of our education system, yet schools, colleges and students have faced great uncertainty as a consequence of the previous Government’s decision to defund a number of applied general qualifications. I welcome the additional certainty that the Minister has provided by committing to maintain some AGQs and pause any further changes until 2027.
The landscape of vocational qualifications is indeed too complex and confusing, but the cliff-edge approach adopted by the previous Government had significant adverse consequences. My Committee has heard evidence that the previous Government’s plans have already had material impacts, because some colleges have modelled the proposed reduction in courses and now face potential insolvency as a result. What support will the Government provide to colleges that have already planned and committed to their qualification offering for September 2025, based on the previous Government’s decision to defund, and now face further changes?
The Committee has also heard evidence of the success of T-levels for those who complete them, particularly in areas such as healthcare. However, T-levels account for just 10% of all vocational courses, and continue to have a worryingly high drop-out rate. What further work are the Government planning between now and 2027 to reform T-levels and make them accessible to a wider range of students, including students with special educational needs and disabilities, before any further changes to AGQs are made? My Committee understands the value and potential of T-levels, but it is vital that in pursuing this route as the predominant option for technical and vocational training, the Government are not locking some young people out of the opportunity to learn, succeed and thrive.
I join the Chair of the Education Committee in praising many colleges, the sector, and teachers themselves. She is right to mention the track record of the previous Government. We very much want to support students in their learning, and especially colleges. Where colleges find that they have to change course, or where there are issues with courses, I invite them to make that known to the Department, to see what support can be provided. The £300 million that has been invested in this area should go some way to providing it. T-levels need much focus through positive communication, and we need to ensure that young people enrol in the right courses. There is a series of events and webinars to inform schools, colleges and other professionals working in educational settings about the outcomes of the review. The Department will publish further information, advice and guidance in relation to 16-to-19 study programmes in the new year.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
I thank the Minister for advance sight of the statement. In the years since the Conservatives’ first botched moves towards prematurely scrapping a range of vocational qualifications, the Liberal Democrats have repeatedly warned of the consequences of that ill thought-through, counterproductive policy, so it is to be welcomed that the Government have heard our and the sector’s concerns. The announcement is a welcome step forward to protect student choice and local decision making, and it is a more pragmatic, rather than ideological, approach. It was clear that the decision to defund was premature. T-levels, while a welcome innovation, had not had enough time to bed in to allow an informed decision, and that risked too many young people being left without appropriate options. Now the Government are providing clarity up to 2027, will the Minister lay out the processes for monitoring and reviewing the impact of those changes until then? Will she lay out the timeline for the longer-term curriculum and assessment review in greater detail?
I have one particular area of concern in the statement, and that is around early years education. Research last year showed that rather than embracing the T-level in education and early years, students overwhelmingly opted for the overlapping qualifications earmarked for defunding. Now we hear the Government will go ahead and proceed with that defunding. Given that reality, how does the announcement square with the Government’s focus and rhetoric around prioritising early years? How will the Government improve recruitment and training in that sector if it is not meeting students’ needs where they are? The point is reflective of a broader question on the announcement, which is: what are the Government’s overarching guiding principles as to which courses will be funded and which will not? The rationale laid out by the Minister suggests they are working on a case-by-case basis, but in the interests of long-term stability and clarity, should the Government not be laying out their principles for how they will approach those decisions more strategically?
Finally, as students face a welcome range of post-16 options—as we have heard, it is a confusing landscape—it is essential that they have excellent support in making those important decisions. How will the Government ensure that all students have access to high-quality careers guidance?
I thank the hon. Member for the many points she made and for acknowledging the Government’s pragmatic response. It was recognised that the previous Government were not focused on social care and childcare, so we needed to relook at those areas and ensure that level 3 and level 2 placements were available. She will be aware that we are conducting the curriculum and assessment review, and the qualifications reform will be connected to the wider review, which will be published next year. There are various other ways that qualifications reform is being monitored in terms of the national audit. We are reviewing the process on an ongoing basis. As well as seeing where the uptake is from students—this is where Skills England will come into play—we are looking at ensuring that organisations and employers are involved in the types of training and courses available for young people, so the connection is very much there. We will follow through with more detail in due course.
The certainty that the statement provides will be an early Christmas present for the further education sector. Last month, I visited Bracknell and Wokingham college, a fantastic FE provider in my constituency where students learn everything from green construction to nursing, electric car maintenance to career guidance, which shows the breadth of opportunities available through the FE sector. Incidentally, those are all skills that will underpin the Government’s missions. The FE sector is vital not only in breaking down barriers to opportunity but as a vehicle for growth, providing the green skills that are necessary to our economy and to support those missions. What more support can the Government put in place for the FE sector, in particular around the difficult issue of pay settlements for FE teachers?
I thank my hon. Friend for highlighting the many important contributions of the FE sector. Pay is not currently set by the pay review bodies, including for FE, and the Government do not set recommended pay in further education. With that said, my noble Friend the Minister has full knowledge of the needs and crucial role of the FE college sector.
When the Minister’s other noble Friend—the distinguished Labour peer Lord Sainsbury—conducted his landmark review of technical and vocational qualifications, he found that they were not only multitudinous and heavily overlapping but had become divorced to a large extent from the very sectors of industry that they were supposed to serve. The overhanging qualifications reform is a massive power grab that the new Government are carrying out, creating a body called Skills England and abolishing the independent institute that oversees technical education standards. Skills England is not even a separate body; it is part of the Department for Education management structure. Under the legislation going through Parliament, the Secretary of State will take to herself the power to oversee standards in technical education. That would not be acceptable for A-levels so, as I asked in Westminster Hall the other day, how can it be possibly acceptable for T-levels? What does that say about this Government’s commitment to parity of esteem?
I will ask my noble Friend the Minister to get back to the right hon. Gentleman on that point.
May I make a correction to what I said in my statement? Qualifications in agriculture, environment and animal care, legal, finance and accounting, business and administration and creative design will not be defunded before 2027, not 2024.
I am minded of that old adage—I suppose I am old enough to remember all these things—that when you ask a fish to climb a tree, it does not make the fish stupid; it just cannot do it. My concern with the qualification review is that we will not have the breadth of scale that allows for student choice and accessibility, and it will try to pinpoint people into roles that they cannot be successful in. How can the Minister ensure that those gifted in academia will have that clear path, and those gifted with job skills will find their place as well, alongside those still searching for their calling who are looking for wide subjects to keep many doors open for their future?
We are keeping 157 of the courses that were outlined to be defunded. That will be reviewed on an ongoing basis depending on uptake. Our focus is very much on economic growth, and our mission is for growth and ensuring that young people have opportunities in T-levels and other qualifications to ensure that they are able to get the jobs that are desperately needed in our country. We are not removing the rules of combination. More variation should support 16 to 19-year-olds to have access to the jobs they wish to do in the future.
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThis Government are focused on enhancing and spreading opportunity and growing our economy. We will ensure that a high quality range of post-16 qualifications is available to sixth forms, through the independent curriculum and assessment review—which is well under way—and through the continued roll-out of T-levels.
In Spelthorne we have six secondary schools, only two of which provide A-levels; the rest are middle schools taking pupils only up to GCSE level. There have been plans in the past to increase sixth-form provision in Spelthorne, but they have been in abeyance for two years. Will the Minister please agree to meet me, so that we can work out what is causing this blockage and unlock the opportunity to which she has just referred?
Obviously many things needed attention because of the last Government, and many things were not accomplished, but I am sure that my noble Friend Baroness Smith of Malvern will be willing to meet the hon. Member to discuss his concerns.
In my constituency there is no A-level provision. Some students have told me that they have to travel for hours just to study, and others consider this a barrier to continuing at school at all. Will my hon. Friend work with me to bring A-levels back to Knowsley?
I thank my hon. Friend for her thoughtful question. The Government are committed to ensuring that young people have access to appropriate education and career opportunities, but the focus must be on delivering provision that offers them the best learning experience and opportunities possible. In Knowsley, A-level provision has not been deemed viable owing to a lack of demand, but students there have access to high quality post-16 academic provision in surrounding boroughs.
Staff in non-academised sixth-form colleges are not being offered the same pay increase as staff in academised colleges. It is understood that a sum of money is available for post-16 education, but colleges have been left completely unclear about whether that sum will be enough to offset the national insurance increase or whether they will find, as universities have, that it is entirely eaten up by that increase. Will the Minister agree to publish the cost of the national insurance increase to sixth-form colleges, and if she will not publish it, why on earth not?
I find it shocking that the shadow Minister has taken no responsibility for the many circumstances in which we have found ourselves having to make decisions that are in the best interests of students and colleges. We are conducting various reviews to try to ensure that we put right the mess that we inherited.
Supporting kinship placements is critical to deliver our opportunity mission to ensure that children grow up in safe and loving homes. We have recently announced a £40 million package to trial a kinship allowance. The trial will test whether an allowance can support more children to settle with family and friends.
I recently met kinship carers in Norwich, who do an amazing job in very difficult circumstances. One of the biggest challenges they face is financial support. Kinship’s recent “Forgotten” report found that children in kinship care are struggling because of an inaccessible and complicated picture of support. Has the Minister made an assessment of extending relevant financial support, such as pupil premium plus, to all children in kinship care?
This Government acknowledge and appreciate the crucial role that kinship carers play. I am pleased that the virtual school heads scheme has been expanded to support kinship children. I encourage kinship carers and schools to work together to support kinship children and those with identified needs. The Department will continue to review the matter, to ensure that children get the right support.
I welcome the Minister’s response about kinship carers. What progress has been made on offering kinship carers respite provision, so that they can be given short-term breaks to ease the pressures facing kinship families?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his very good question. It is important that kinship carers, as well as the children they are looking after, have the support they need. Through the process of family group decision making, families will come together to have conversations about how best to support children in kinship care. Respite and other related matters will be discussed to ensure that the right provision is in place. This Government are committed to getting it right for children, especially where the previous Government failed.
We are making good progress with the review of qualifications reform, which has focused on the level 3 qualifications that are scheduled to have their funding removed on 31 July 2025. We are working quickly to provide certainty to the sector, and will publish the outcomes of the review before the end of the year.
I draw the House’s attention to my declared interests: I am the governor of a sixth-form college. I thank the Minister for that answer, but she will know that the certainty that she hopes to give is simply not there. Colleges have had to put off printing prospectuses. They have had open evenings and assemblies for schools at which they have not been able to confirm what they will teach. There are staff allocation issues, and they have even been asked to make projections about T-level funding for T-levels that they are not sure they will have the pupil numbers for, because they do not know which equivalent BTecs will be stood down. They will enter 2025 not knowing what they can teach. Does she think that is acceptable? What support will there be for colleges that will have to turn things around very quickly, whatever the outcome of the review?
I thank my hon. Friend for really pushing me on this issue, and for explaining the situation so well. I acknowledge to him and the sector the uncertainty and difficulties in this area. Following the election, we moved quickly to pause the defunding that was scheduled for 31 July 2024. I fully appreciate that colleges need time to plan their provision, and that students need time to plan what courses they will take. We are working as quickly as possible to conclude the review, and we will publish the outcomes before the end of the year.
We are all keenly aware of the significant challenges that further education colleges continue to face, such as difficulties around repair agreements and funding, which are not helped by the opportunism from the Opposition, who are responsible for the mess those colleges are in in the first place. Can the Minister tell us more about the steps she is taking to ensure that these engines for opportunity for our young people, such as Leyton sixth-form college, have the support they need to thrive?
This Government recognise the vital role that FE teachers play in equipping learners with the skills they need to drive growth in our economy. We are totally committed, and we are keeping our eye and our finger on it. We have provided an additional £300 million for further education to ensure that young people develop the skills that this country so desperately needs.
Over the weekend, Immanuel prep in my constituency announced it was closing, citing VAT on school fees and other damaging Labour policies. Does the Secretary of State share my concern about the damage that will do to Jewish children growing up in my constituency and the surrounding area, who will be deprived of access to a Jewish education, which they richly deserve?
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I begin by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Erewash (Adam Thompson) on securing this important debate. As he eloquently expressed, he has a keen interest in the financial stability of the higher education sector and many other areas, and so do this Government. I agree with him how great our universities are and I will attempt to respond to many points that he has raised.
I join the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) in acknowledging our fantastic lecturers, as well as some of the excellent work of our universities up and down the country. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) for her many contributions, including around international students.
I will respond to the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston (Neil O'Brien). However, I find it difficult to hear the many things he said about the pressures on young people when the last Government had 14 years to take our universities out of the dire situation they now find themselves in. I find it quite astonishing that the previous Government and the shadow Minister have taken no responsibility, offered no apology and shown no acceptance of the disadvantaged situation our universities are in.
I am going to make some progress and respond to the many points that have been raised—unless he would like to make an apology.
The Minister is complaining about the lack of resources in real terms for universities. Can she confirm that because of the national insurance increase resources in real terms are going to go down, wiping out the impact of the tuition fee increase, with the price of everything going up?
Indeed: no apology, no recognition of what I just said, and no recognition of having been in Government for 14 years previously.
There are many questions to respond to, and I will focus first and foremost on my hon. Friend the Member for Erewash, who secured the debate. The Government recognise that our world-leading higher education sector makes a vital contribution, as both education and research institutions, to our economy, to society, to industry and to innovation. They contribute to productivity and growth, and play a crucial civic role in their communities. However, the sector needs a secure financial footing to face the challenges of the next decade. We recognise that the financial position of the sector is under pressure, and the Government have already acted to address that.
In July, Sir David Behan was appointed as interim chair of the Office for Students, the independent regulator of higher education in England. Sir David is overseeing the important work of refocusing the role of the Office for Students to concentrate on key priorities including the sector’s financial stability. In recognition of the pressures facing the sector, on 2 December the Office for Students announced temporary changes to its operations to allow greater focus on financial sustainability. To protect the interests of the students, the OfS will work more closely with providers that are under significant pressure. The OfS has rightly stated that an increasing number of providers will need to take bold action to address the impact of these challenges. All providers must continue to adapt to uncertainties and financial risk.
While the OfS has statutory duties in relation to the financial sustainability of the higher education sector, the Government have a clear interest in understanding the sector’s level of risk. My Department continues to work closely with the OfS, higher education representative groups such as Universities UK, and other Government Departments such as the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. That helps us to understand the financial sustainability in the sector. If a provider was at risk of unplanned closure or found itself in the process of exiting the sector, my Department would work with the OfS, the provider and other Government Departments to ensure that students’ best interests were protected.
Of course, higher education providers are autonomous bodies. As such, they are ultimately responsible for the decisions they make about their operating model, day-by-day management and sustainability. However, the Government very much recognise the need to put—and sustain—our world-leading higher education sector on a secure footing to ensure that all students have the confidence that they will receive the world-class higher education experience they deserve.
After seven years of frozen fee caps under the previous Government, on 4 November the Secretary of State for Education announced that maximum fees for undergraduates will increase in line with inflation. In the 2025-26 academic year, fees will increase by 3.1%, from £9,250 to £9,535 for a standard full-time course, from £11,100 to £11,440 for a full-time accelerated course and from £6,935 to £7,145 for a part-time course. I am aware that yesterday the Welsh Labour Government also announced that tuition fees will rise from £9,250 to £9,535 for standard full-time courses. While this was a difficult decision, I believe the right decision has been made for UK higher education. I want to be clear, however, that in return for the increased investment that we are asking students to make, we expect our providers to deliver the very best outcomes for students, their areas and the country.
The Government also recognise the impact that recent inflation has had on students. That is why, in addition to increasing tuition fees to support our higher education providers, the Secretary of State announced that maximum loans for living costs for undergraduate students will also increase in line with forecast inflation. In the 2025-26 academic year, maximum loans for living costs will increase by 3.1%, from £10,227 to £10,544, for an undergraduate student living away from home and studying outside London. That will ensure that the most support is targeted at students from the lowest-income families, while keeping the student finance system financially sustainable.
As part of the Secretary of State’s announcements on 4 November, she set out our five priorities for reform of the higher education system. We will expect our providers to play a stronger role in expanding access and improving outcomes for disadvantaged students; to make a stronger contribution to economic growth; to play a greater civic role in their communities—many already do excellent work in this area—and to raise the bar further on teaching standards to maintain and improve our world-leading reputation and drive out poor practice. I am very sure that that is also their ambition. Underpinning all that, the sector must undertake a sustained efficiency and reform programme. We will publish our plan for higher education reform by summer 2025 and will work with the sector and the OfS to ensure that the system delivers those priorities.
I take this opportunity to respond to my hon. Friend the Member for Erewash and reaffirm the Government’s commitment to a United Kingdom that is outward looking and welcomes international students, as commented on by my hon. Friend the Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire. For too long, international students have been treated as political footballs and not valued guests. This Government will take a different approach and will speak clearly. Be in no doubt: international students are welcome in the UK. That is why we offer international students who successfully complete their studies the opportunity to remain in the UK to work, live and contribute to our national life. I know there have been other questions on that issue, and I will endeavour to get back to Members on them.
I am aware that there have been calls to bring back maintenance grants. The Government continue to provide means-tested, non-repayable grants to low-income students with children and/or adults who are financially dependent on them. Students undertaking nursing, midwifery and allied health professional courses qualify for non-repayable grant support through the NHS learning support fund. As we know, this is a space where much more needs to be done. We need to rebuild our NHS and put it back on a secure footing.
These are just some of the ways in which this Government are trying to mend the failures of the past. However, we recognise there is much more to be done to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and we are determined to reverse the decline in participation rates for disadvantaged students. We expect the higher education sector to do more to support students by working with the Government and the OfS and by making the most of the lifelong learning entitlement. We will be setting out our longer-term plans for the sector next year.
I understand that there have been some concerns regarding the recent OfS announcement that it is enacting temporary changes to its operation to allow a greater focus on financial sustainability. As the Minister for Skills explained in the House of Lords yesterday, this decision by the OfS reflects the Government’s determination to move our providers towards a firmer financial footing. The refocusing of the OfS on the issue of financial sustainability and our decision to increase tuition fees demonstrate our ambition to create a secure future for our world-leading higher education sector.
Before I close, I will briefly set out the Government’s position on research funding, which is the responsibility of the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. We committed to record funding for research and development in the recent Budget. We are increasing core research funding to more than £6.1 billion to offer real-terms protection to the UK’s world-leading research base and to support UK Research and Innovation in delivering on the UK’s key research priorities. This Government are determined to work with the sector to help it to transition to sustainable research funding models, including increasing research grant cost recovery.
I again thank everybody who has contributed significantly to this debate—
I just wanted to rephrase my question. Do this Government think it is okay not to answer basic questions about how much the national insurance increase is costing education providers—be they nurseries, schools or universities? Can the Minister confirm that she will answer those questions?
I understand that there are some concerns regarding how the sector will contend with increases to employers’ national insurance contributions. As the Chancellor set out in the Budget, raising the revenue necessary to fund public services and restore economic stability requires difficult decisions on tax, which is why the Government are asking employers to contribute more. We strongly believe that this is the fairest choice to help to fund the NHS and wider national priorities, which were failed by the previous Government and strongly need a greater focus on building up public services and public provision.
As set out in the November update on the financial sustainability of the sector, the OfS estimates that the fee uplift will represent up to an additional £371 million of annual fee income. The national insurance contribution changes for employers will result in additional costs for the sector of £133 million in 2024-25 and of £430 million in each year from 2025-26. The Department plans to publish its own estimates shortly, as part of its assessment of the impact of the planned tuition fee and student finance changes.
We are committed to creating a secure future for our world-leading higher education sector so that it can deliver for students, taxpayers, workers and the economy. Although the Government have already taken action to help to move the sector towards a more sustainable and stable financial footing, we recognise that a real change of approach is needed, both from the Government and from the sector itself, to support our broader plans for higher education. For that reason, we look forward to working in partnership with the sector, the Office for Students, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, and UK Research and Innovation to shape the changes to Government policy.
(2 months ago)
Written CorrectionsOne thing that might be driving absences from schools for young carers is long-term mental health conditions. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health says that as many as one in five young carers could be suffering from long-term mental health conditions. Can the Minister explain what measures the Department is taking to ensure that sufficient help is in place for people suffering from those conditions?
We want to ensure that we support young carers in school, as well as other children who may be suffering from mental health conditions. This Government are entirely committed to supporting young people with mental health conditions, and we are making sure that there will be mental health support in every school up and down the country. For young carers who may be experiencing increasing mental health conditions, we are expanding the attendance mentoring programme to ensure that around an extra 10,800 young carers are supported, especially in the area of mental health.
[Official Report, 4 November 2024; Vol. 756, c. 15.]
Written correction submitted by the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Lewisham East (Janet Daby):
… This Government are entirely committed to supporting young people with mental health conditions, and we are making sure that there will be mental health support in every school up and down the country. We are expanding the attendance mentoring programme to ensure that around an extra 10,800 young people are supported, including in the area of mental health.
(2 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a privilege to speak with you in the Chair, Sir Christopher. I congratulate the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds) on securing this important debate, and I thank him for sharing his wide and comprehensive knowledge of past and present qualifications and awards. I am also grateful for the challenge that he and many other Members have brought to this debate. This Government are ambitious for young people, and we are excited and optimistic about what can be achieved.
As Members have rightly stated and spoken about, apprenticeships, BTECs and T-levels can offer incredible opportunities for young people. We have heard from many Members about the superb colleges and students in their constituencies, such as the hon. Members for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke) and for Sutton and Cheam (Luke Taylor), as well as my hon. Friends the Members for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes (Melanie Onn) and for Dudley (Sonia Kumar). My hon. Friends the Members for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) and for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) both mentioned an invite to their respective colleges, and of course I will pass those on to my noble Friend the Minister for Skills.
Will the Minister also take back an invitation to Stoke-on-Trent to our noble Friend?
Very smart and clever indeed—I will of course pass on that invitation to Stoke-on-Trent as well. We have also heard from the hon. Members for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking), for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and for Mid Leicestershire (Mr Bedford)—it was great to hear about his brother’s achievements, so I thank him for that. There were contributions from my hon. Friends the Members for Hartlepool (Mr Brash) and for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell), the hon. Members for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron), for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire (Ian Sollom) and for Wokingham (Clive Jones), and the shadow Minister—the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston (Neil O’Brien).
Members have spoken about many issues in this debate, such as greater diversity in the workforce, including both women in STEM and the representation of people from diverse backgrounds. Concerns have also been raised about BTECs, apprenticeships and T-levels—for example, the apprenticeship levy, the teaching of further education, the reform of qualifications, and colleges needing certainty in the future about specific courses. I hope to address as many of those and other remarks as time allows, including the points raised by the right hon. Member for East Hampshire.
It is this Government’s mission to drive and increase opportunity for young people across the country. Working with Skills England, it is also this Government’s mission to support employers to train people up and identify and develop the skills they need to grow, helping to kick-start economic growth. Early investment in young people pays off for employers. We want young people to be enthusiastic, energised and passionate about learning and developing in their work. That will benefit employers, industry and our wider economy, which will be galvanised by a new generation who are willing to work hard and progress in their careers.
It has been concerning in recent years that young people have seen their apprenticeship opportunities disappear. We ask ourselves, “Why is that?” It may be helpful to remind the shadow Minister that following apprenticeship reforms made by the previous Government, including the introduction of the apprenticeship levy in 2017, apprenticeship starts by young people under 25 fell by almost 40% according to the Department for Education’s published data. It is also concerning that so many workers and employers have told us that they find it difficult to access the skills they need. UK employers report that more than a third of UK vacancies in 2022 were due to skill shortages. That is what we have inherited.
According to a stark statement from the OECD, 26% of the UK workforce are underqualified for their job, compared with an OECD average of 18%. There are widespread skills shortages in areas such as construction, manufacturing and health and social care. We desperately need workers in those areas. That is why meeting the skills needs of the next decade is central to delivering our Government’s five missions, which, I remind everybody, are economic growth, opportunity for all, a stronger NHS, safer streets and clean energy.
This Government will create a clear, flexible, high-quality skills system with a culture of businesses valuing and investing in training that supports people of all ages and backgrounds, breaking down the barriers to opportunity and driving economic growth. We are bringing forward legislation to enable Skills England to work with key stakeholders. Skills England will make sure that we know where our skills gaps are to ensure that a comprehensive suite of apprenticeships, training and technical qualifications is aligned with those skills gaps and the needs of employers.
I have heard concerns that Skills England will not have the independence or authority it needs. I would like to dispel those concerns today: Skills England will have an independent board that will provide leadership and direction, as well as scrutiny to ensure that it operates effectively and within the agreed framework,
Growth and skills are essential. We have listened to employers, who have told us that the current apprenticeship system does not work. We must do more to support them in accessing the training they need to fill their skills gaps and spread opportunity. Our growth and skills offer will provide employers and learners with greater flexibility and choice and create routes into good, skilled jobs in growing industries aligned with our industrial strategy.
I am going to make progress, and then I will take some interventions if I can.
We are introducing new shorter-duration apprenticeships and foundation apprenticeships as a first key step towards greater flexibility that will benefit employers and, indeed, students. We recognise that some roles need less than 12 months’ training and employers are currently locked out of offering apprenticeships. We want to support sectors that make use of fixed-term contracts or have seasonal demands or specific recruitment timetables. We will engage with employers via Skills England and introduce that flexibility where the justification is clear. Our new work-based foundation apprenticeship will focus on ensuring that training is directed towards real vacancies. It will offer young people broad training with clear and seamless progression into other apprenticeships. Unlike the last Government, we will work closely with employers and providers. This Government will make sure we get it right.
The Minister talked about introducing flexibility where appropriate—it sounded like perhaps only in some sectors. Is it still the intention for all employers to be able to use 50% of their apprenticeship levy for things that are not apprenticeships?
The area the shadow Minister mentioned is currently being reviewed. As that information comes out, I am sure we will make him aware of it.
To open up the growth and skills offer and to deliver opportunity where it is most needed, we will ask more employers to step forward and fund level 7 apprenticeships themselves, outside the apprenticeship budget. Of the 2.5 million workers in critical demand occupations, the vast majority—more than 80%—require qualifications lower than degree level, so it feels right that we focus our support on those at the start of their working lives, rather than those already towards the top of the ladder.
The Government believe that all young people should have access to high-quality training that meets their needs and provides them with opportunities to thrive. That is why we are committed to making a success of T-levels and extending the opportunity they provide to as many young people as possible. We have introduced three new T-levels this year, opening up more opportunity for young people in the areas of craft and design, media, broadcast and production, and animal care. It was great to see an overall pass rate this year of nearly 90% and to learn that 83% of T-level students who applied to higher education secured a place.
At the end of the last academic year, more than 30,000 young people had taken a T-level, and we want to ensure that many more have the opportunity to study them, but we know that some changes are needed if we want to make that a reality. That is why we are looking at the delivery of current T-levels to ensure that more young people are able to enrol and succeed in them. Our review of post-16 qualifications reforms will ensure that there is a range of high-quality qualifications at level 3, alongside T-levels and A-levels, to support the skills needs of employers and the needs of learners.
Will the Government agree to publish the terms of reference of that review?
I have heard the shadow Minister mention that already, and I believe he has already received a response. [Interruption.] No, the shadow Minister has already received a response.
I am sorry—I have already answered.
Last month’s Budget saw a good settlement for further education and skills, including £300 million revenue funding for further education and £300 million capital investment to support colleges to maintain, improve and secure the suitability of their estates.
Each one of us here knows the importance of high-quality skills training for young people, and I am grateful for the considered contributions of everyone who has spoken. When we look at the statistics, it is clear that for too long, young people have been locked out of the opportunities that can benefit them most. The actions I have outlined today will give us a real sense of how to make a difference for learners and employers. That is at the heart of the Government’s mission to spread opportunity and drive economic growth across all parts of our country.
(2 months ago)
Written StatementsToday is World Children’s Day, marking the 35th anniversary of the date that the UN adopted the convention on the rights of the child, setting out the fundamental rights held by each and every child across the world.
This new Government will be a mission-led one, and one of our five missions is to break down the barriers to opportunity. The Government are determined to break the unfair link between background and success once and for all.
Our ambition is to create a society in Britain where the life chances of every child are front and centre and where every child and young person believes that success belongs to them.
We are taking swift action to improve the lives of every child. Our new policy statement, “Keeping Children Safe, Helping Families Thrive”, sets out ambitious proposals to fix children’s social care so that it provides help and protection to our most vulnerable children; and we will seek to legislate to enact these proposals when parliamentary time allows. Action on child poverty is being driven by our new Child Poverty Taskforce, which was established within weeks of the new Government taking power and is co-chaired by the Secretaries of State for Education and for Work and Pensions.
With the support of our stakeholders and by actively listening to children and young people, we are determined to deliver profound, lasting change for all children and young people, and particularly those from disadvantaged and deprived backgrounds. We will continue to place children at the heart of our ambitions.
[HCWS237]