(1 year, 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
It is a privilege to speak with you in the Chair, Sir John. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire Dales (John Whitby) on securing a debate on this important subject, and I thank hon. Members for their interventions. I will attempt to respond to as many as possible in the time that I have.
I know that this subject is close to my hon. Friend’s heart, because he has been a foster carer for many years; as a former children and families social worker and fostering manager, it is close mine, too. I am delighted and proud to be part of a Government who are making such a difference for children in care. I thank all foster carers for the care that they provide to foster children across our country.
Children in care are among the most vulnerable in our society. My hon. Friend is correct that the number of children in care has increased year on year since 2010, under the previous Government. The problems facing the children’s care system were set out in a 2022 review led by my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), and the Competition and Markets Authority also reported on failings in the children’s social care market that year. Both called for radical action. This Government inherited a broken care system that is failing too many children, despite the heroic efforts of social workers, carers and all those who champion children’s outcomes.
We are taking action. Since the election, we have announced funding in the Budget to enable more children to stay in family-centred environments, including the largest ever national investment in kinship care of £40 million. We have also published a policy statement with ambitious plans to reform children’s social care and focus the system towards early help for families.
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
On the point about early intervention and prevention, I thank the Minister for agreeing to visit Sussex later this year to meet me and an organisation called Pause, which works with mothers who have had a child taken into care. It works across a number of local authorities but by no means all, and I hope that the Government will look favourably upon its work and enable more funding to support it in more areas.
I thank the hon. Member for that intervention and I look forward to visiting Sussex.
In the local government finance settlement, we announced two grants that will double settlement investment in preventive children’s services to over £500 million in 2025-26. We have introduced legislation to underpin our reforms, in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. The actions we plan to take do not stop there: we have a vision to improve services for children in care and we are on that journey.
Foster carers offer crucial support to some of the most vulnerable children in our society. They provide love, stability and compassion to children and young people when they need it most. We recognise that there are sufficiency challenges in foster care and we want to recruit more foster carers, so that foster care is available for more children who need it, in the places where they live. On that point, I say to anybody listening to the debate who is interested in becoming a foster carer: please do contact your local authority children’s services.
In the autumn Budget, we announced an additional £15 million to expand the fostering recruitment and retention programme. My Department is currently supporting two thirds of local authorities across England in 10 regional hubs. The extra funding will expand our approach to ensure that every local authority has access to that support. The regional hubs support foster carers from their first inquiry through to providing a retention model. Our aim is to boost the number of approvals among those who apply to become foster carers, and take further steps to retain those who we have. I note the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire Dales about the need to retain foster carers and I absolutely agree with him.
No foster carer should be financially disadvantaged because of their fostering role. We expect all foster carers to receive at least the weekly national minimum allowance, in addition to any agreed expenses, to cover the full cost of caring for each child placed with them. In January, local authorities were sent a letter to remind them of their duty to provide the national minimum allowance and to notify them of the latest 3.55% uplift. Fostering service providers can choose to pay above the minimum allowance or to pay additional fees. Qualifying care relief, a tax relief, is also available to support foster carers. The threshold for the relief has been raised in recent years to ensure that the vast majority of foster carers will not pay tax on their care income. We encourage fostering service providers to adhere to the foster care charter, which sets out clear principles for how foster carers should be treated and recognises their invaluable work.
For most children in care, foster care is the best option when they cannot live in kinship arrangements. Kinship care, which has been mentioned by Members across the Chamber, is an area where the Government are investing. We recognise that for some young people, kinship care is absolutely where they need to be, and that kinship carers need support to enable them to care for their children. We announced £90 million of capital funding in the autumn Budget to fund new places in children’s homes and to secure children’s homes.
We are using that money in two ways. First, we are providing funding to maintain existing provision and expand capacity across both secure and open children’s homes. That will provide 180 additional open children’s home placements by late 2025. It will also help local authorities to support our most vulnerable children accommodated in specialist care in secure children’s homes, including continuing plans to create two brand-new secure homes in London and the west midlands. We recognise that we need a variation of care dependent on the care needs of the child.
Secondly, we are taking action to provide increased provision specifically for children with multiple complex needs who have been, or are at risk of being, deprived of their liberty. For such children, their needs will be a response to complex ongoing trauma. We have invited local authorities to bid for new capital funding to build 200 new places in local authority children’s homes. Local authorities and health partners will be encouraged to work together to deliver suitable packages of care and plans to support these young people. Alongside that, the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill will create a new statutory mechanism that allows children with complex needs to be placed in safe, flexible and secure community-based provision that keeps children safe. All young people should receive consistently high-quality care. To improve the quality of children’s homes, the Bill will strengthen Ofsted’s powers to hold provider groups to account where there are quality issues.
The current children’s social care placement market is dysfunctional. It is not delivering enough safe, loving homes for children in the right parts of the country at a sustainable cost to the taxpayer. As has been mentioned, some councils are on the brink of bankruptcy, in part due to the rising cost of spending on children in care, while some providers are making excess profits despite sometimes providing sub-par care for our most vulnerable children. The Government are clear that profiteering from vulnerable children in care is absolutely unacceptable, and we are committed to stamping it out where it occurs in the children’s social care market.
We are introducing a package of measures to fix this. The measures will rebalance the market and improve competition, regulation and the commissioning of placements. They will shine a light on the levels of profit being made and bring greater visibility to the prices that local authorities are paying. The measures, which are in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, form a key part of our strategy to address the problems of the market.
I am enormously grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire Dales for speaking so eloquently and passionately about children in care, his experiences and the many issues to do with children’s social care. This subject means a great deal to him, as it does to me and to our Government. We need to get this right. There is a lot to do. I acknowledge the dedication that he has shown in his working life. Our opportunity mission is focused on breaking the link between children’s backgrounds and their success. I am determined to support and to improve the life chances of children in care, and this Government have an ambitious plan.
Question put and agreed to.
(1 year, 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
It is a privilege to speak with you as Chair, Ms Jardine. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) on securing a debate on this subject and on his thoughtful speech. Whether in debates like today, or in his role as co-chair of the APPG on apprenticeships, he is an excellent ambassador for apprenticeships. I appreciate his enthusiasm and drive, and I was extremely impressed to hear that he has visited over 100 businesses since being a Member of Parliament.
As we have heard, I have a good many questions to respond to and I will endeavour to do my best. It is refreshing to hear from the many Members on the Government Benches about their grassroots experiences; there are those who have held jobs, been apprentices and are well connected to their communities, and we appreciate them all.
I want to set the record straight when it comes to what the Government have inherited. As well as inheriting the £22 billion black hole, we also inherited the fact that one in eight 16 to 24-year-olds are not in education, employment or training. Indeed, UK employers have said to us that a third of vacancies are due to skills shortages under the previous Government. Technical training at level 4 and 5 in the UK is at only 4% of adults, compared to Germany at 20% and Canada at 34%. What we have inherited is absolutely staggering. This is a Government for change—we are investing in our people and their future careers, and I will continue to speak about these issues.
I acknowledge everybody who has spoken: my hon. Friends the Members for Stafford (Leigh Ingham), for Barrow and Furness (Michelle Scrogham), for Gloucester (Alex McIntyre), for Rugby (John Slinger) for Coatbridge and Bellshill (Frank McNally), for Leicester South (Shockat Adam), for Derby South (Baggy Shanker), for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Alison Taylor), for Carlisle (Ms Minns), for Hexham (Joe Morris), for South West Norfolk (Terry Jermy), for Nuneaton (Jodie Gosling), for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae), for Colchester (Pam Cox), for Erewash (Adam Thompson), for Barking (Nesil Caliskan), for Hitchin (Alistair Strathern), and for Tipton and Wednesbury (Antonia Bance), as well as my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Tony Vaughan), the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), and the hon. Members for Strangford (Jim Shannon), for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke), for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) and for Reigate (Rebecca Paul). I thank them all for their contributions.
National Apprenticeship Week promises to be the best yet, with more than 1,000 events across the country showcasing all that apprenticeships have to offer, as well as the wonderful apprentices taking to social media, including Instagram, to share their stories to inspire the apprentices of tomorrow. I thank all the apprentices, employers and providers who have worked so hard to provide these opportunities and to make apprenticeships such a success.
We know that right now the system is not working for far too many young people who have the most to gain from apprenticeships, but who have too often been locked out of accessing these opportunities. Apprenticeship starts by young people under 25 fell by almost 40% between 2015-16 and 2023-24. We are committed to changing this and to rebalancing the system to support more young people. That is why we are introducing new foundation apprenticeships in targeted, growing sectors. These will give more young people a foot in the door at the start of their working lives, while supporting the pipeline of new talent that employers will need to drive economic growth. We are working closely with employers and providers to design these new offers and ensure that they have the opportunity to develop their infrastructure before training and assessment starts.
We also want to make sure that apprentice wages support the attraction of talented individuals into apprenticeships. We are increasing the apprenticeship minimum wage by 18% this April, from £6.40 to £7.55, which will boost the hourly rate for thousands of young apprentices across a range of sectors and those in their first year of an apprenticeship.
We will continue to support care leavers to undertake apprenticeships. Apprentices under the age of 25 who have been in local authority care can claim a bursary of £3,000 when they start an apprenticeship. We will continue to pay £1,000 to both employers and training providers to support them to take on apprentices aged under 19, or 19 to 24 if they have an education, health and care plan or have been in care. Employers are exempt from paying towards employees’ national insurance for all apprentices aged up to 25 when the employee’s wage is below £50,270 a year.
As we work to support more apprenticeship opportunities for young people, it is vital we make sure they are aware of these opportunities. We are promoting career starter apprenticeships, suitable for those leaving full-time education, and targeting young people through the Skills for Life campaign. We have committed to improving careers advice and guaranteeing two weeks of work experience for every young person, as well as to establishing a national jobs and careers service to support people into work and help them to get on at work.
We are also taking action to support employers who want to build the skilled workforce they need for long-term success but who have told us they have not been able to find the right training options. In recent years, UK employers have said that over a third of their vacancies were down to skill shortages. That is why, as a key step of our levy-funded growth and skills offer, we will be introducing shorter duration apprenticeships. These will allow employers to benefit from high-quality apprenticeship training for valuable, in-demand roles that need less than 12 months’ training to be fully occupationally competent, offering more flexibility where that is right for the employer and the learner. We will continue to listen to employers as we deliver the greater flexibility they have called for, and to work with them as we build a vigorous and responsive skills system that will support employers to fill skills gaps that are holding back our economy.
After the Conservatives left us with a collapsing apprenticeship system as well as skills shortages, Labour is listening to employers and redrawing the system through Skills England, a new growth and skills levy, and new foundation apprenticeships. Apprenticeship starts by young people under 25 fell by almost 40% between 2015-16 and 2023-24. The Government are focusing on establishing a coherent skills system, with more flexible training options that support employers to fill skills gaps by driving growth and spreading opportunity. We are introducing foundation apprenticeships to get young people into work-based training and employment, as well as delivering shorter duration apprenticeships to provide flexibility for employers and learners.
SMEs are incredibly important to the economy and to apprenticeships. They are more likely to employ younger apprentices and apprentices from disadvantaged areas. We pay 100% of the training costs for young apprentices aged 16 to 21 and for apprentices aged 22 to 24 who have an education, health and care plan or have been in local authority care where they have undertaken apprenticeships with SMEs. As I have mentioned, we also pay £1,000 to employers and providers for apprentices aged 16 to 18 and those aged 19 to 24 who have an EHCP. We will ensure that we consider the needs of the smaller employer as we develop our levy-funded growth and skills offer.
The Government’s first mission is to kickstart economic growth. Across the country, skills gaps are holding back business growth, so we will support employers to invest in skills training. That brings me on to Skills England. We know that right now the skills system in England is complex. There is no shared national ambition on skills development. There is a need to bring together in one place a range of functions, currently scattered across different organisations, to better support the delivery of the skills that the economy needs and to further our industrial strategy, and growth and opportunity missions.
We are setting up Skills England to address these problems by bringing coherence and efficiency to the system, for the benefit of learners, businesses and local areas. Skills England will ensure that we know where our skills gaps are, and the training needed to fill them now and in the future. Skills England will combine the best available statistical data, with insights generated by employers and other key stakeholders. It will also ensure that there is a comprehensive suite of apprenticeships, training and technical qualifications that are aligned with skills gaps and the needs of employers.
The first Skills England report highlighted employer demand for levels 4 and 5—high technical qualifications; those qualifications have been independently approved as providing the skills that employers need. Skills England will work closely with employers, providers, trade unions, Government Departments, combined authorities, regional bodies and other agencies, all of which will help deliver our mission to drive economic growth and to open up a world of opportunity for young people and adults. The Government have an ambitious plan to rebuild Britain. We will deliver 1.5 million homes in England in this Parliament. Around 5,000 more construction apprenticeship places will be made available per year by 2027-28, thanks to an £140 million industry investment to get Britain building again.
We welcome Peterborough’s commitment to breaking down barriers to opportunity by being part of one of eight youth trailblazers that will launch in April 2025. Peterborough and Cambridgeshire have just announced the formation of their youth forum to shape the youth guarantee, to ensure that the voices and perspectives of young people are included in decision making. That pilot will address the needs and challenges faced by the young people in that area. It was wonderful to hear from many MPs about the work in their constituencies. I thank everybody for championing the work that the Government are doing in this area.
On a point of order, Ms Jardine. The hon. Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) has not wound up the debate.
(1 year, 1 month ago)
Written StatementsMy right hon. Friend, the Minister of State, Minister for Skills (Baroness Smith of Malvern) has made the following statement.
I am today announcing the publication of a consultation which sets out the Government proposals to strengthen oversight of partnership delivery in higher education. This consultation is one of the actions the Government are taking to protect public money. It was developed in response to the recommendations made by the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee last year about the regulatory oversight of student loan funding for study at franchised providers.
English higher education providers are amongst the most highly regarded in the world, supporting learners to succeed for themselves, their communities and our country, and driving the economic growth we need. They also play a key role in this Government’s missions to break down barriers to opportunity and to drive economic growth. Higher education can open the door to opportunity for many, but only where that education is good quality and subject to effective management and governance.
The Office for Students (OfS) is the regulator responsible for higher education in England. Higher education providers must register with the OfS for their courses to be designated for publicly funded student finance. Some registered providers subcontract or “franchise” delivery of courses to partners that are not subject to the same regulatory requirements. Whilst there are many good examples of franchised provision being used to expand access and participation and deliver high quality provision, franchised higher education is one area where we have seen too many examples of abuse of public money in recent years and some concerning indicators of poor quality.
Students make a significant investment in higher education and they deserve to have confidence that in return they will receive excellent teaching, strong support and value for money. Taxpayers too deserve to know that the public money invested in student loans to help students access higher education is properly protected from fraud and misuse.
The proposals we are consulting on aim to bring franchised providers under greater scrutiny to help safeguard against the risks of misuse of public money and low-quality provision. This consultation proposes a requirement that franchised providers with 300 or more students should be directly regulated by the Office for Students if they want their students to access student loan funding.
The Government are committed to supporting innovation and competition. We recognise that franchising can provide smaller, innovative providers with the opportunity to enter the higher education sector. Setting a size threshold will still allow new and smaller providers who may find registration disproportionately burdensome to access the higher education market.
Whilst the OfS has currently paused registration of new higher education providers to support the sector with financial sustainability concerns, we expect this pause to cease before the Department’s proposed changes would come into effect.
The Office for Students announced last September that it had opened formal investigations into some universities’ and colleges’ subcontractual arrangements and that their next cycle of quality assessments would largely focus on the academic experiences of students studying through subcontractual arrangements. The Office for Students is consulting on proposals to strengthen expectations on providers wishing to join its register. This includes strengthening requirements that protect student interests and ensure effective governance and management of higher education. It has also communicated plans to publish student outcomes for all subcontractual partnerships on an annual basis from this year.
As a whole, I believe that these proposals will bring about the changes that are necessary to ensure that student loan funding is protected from misuse and students studying at franchised providers can have confidence that their courses are subject to rigorous quality requirements.
[HCWS403]
(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberThe Government do not set or recommend pay in further education. However, in the midst of tough decisions taken at the Budget to fix the foundations, after having been left with a £22 billion black hole by the Conservatives, we have reprioritised an additional £300 million for further education.
I declare an interest, because my husband works at Luton sixth-form college, although this question does not affect him. I am proud to have Luton sixth-form college and Barnfield college in my constituency—places where young people develop not only their education but their ambitions. Excellent sixth forms stay that way only by attracting and retaining the best staff. However, with the funding shortfall left by the last Tory Government, I am concerned that it is our younger generations who will feel the loss. Will the Minister outline how sixth-form colleges can use their funds to deliver the deserved 5.5% pay rise for teaching staff?
I recognise the vital role that sixth-form colleges play, including Luton sixth-form college, and I agree that high-quality staff are what helps to make them great, as well as our amazing students. That is why we announced an additional £300 million for further education in the Budget, and it is why we are releasing £50 million of that funding in this academic year, so that colleges can respond to priorities, including workforce recruitment and retention, and use those funds as they see fit.
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
Balcarras school in my constituency has calculated that if its funding for its sixth form had increased by just 2% over the past 15 years, it would now have more than £650,000 extra to keep its school running. The head warns me that the sector is now at breaking point. Do Ministers recognise what is going on in the sector after the years of underfunding we have had?
I reiterate that the one-off £50 million grant will enable colleges to respond to current priorities and challenges as they see fit, including workforce recruitment and retention. It is up to those colleges and sixth forms to choose how to use that funding to best meet learners’ needs. I invite the hon. Member to write in if he would like some further information.
The hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) has asked a very important question. The Government funded the pay award for schools and academised sixth-form colleges but, unlike last year, not for stand-alone sixth-form colleges. That decision has already led to seven days of industrial action. After threats of judicial review, the Department for Education offered some additional funding, but only £7 million of the £19 million that is needed. That funding gap has led to a pay gap, and as a result the National Education Union has more strikes planned and the NASUWT is also balloting. What is the Government’s plan to end the dispute and end the damage that is being done to those students?
The hon. Member will know that industrial relations are a matter for sixth-form colleges themselves, in co-ordination with the sector-led national bargaining arrangement through the national joint council. We encourage open and constructive dialogue by all parties in the best interests of staff and students during this critical transition period.
Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)
Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)
As autonomous institutions, universities are responsible for their staffing decisions, including recruitment and retention. Where the Tories left universities on the brink, we have acted decisively to secure the future of the higher education sector. We remain committed to restoring universities as engines of growth, opportunity and aspiration.
Peter Prinsley
The number of clinical academics is in worrying decline. These are the people who teach our doctors in universities and are conducting groundbreaking research. Consultant clinical academics’ contracts with universities give them pay parity with the NHS. However, the universities do not have the funding to match the costs of the new NHS pay structure for consultants. I have heard that, unable to retain them, 20 out of 26 medical schools in the country are offering voluntary redundancy to their staff, and sometimes not voluntary. Does the Minister agree that we must do all we can to support medical education and research in this country?
I am aware that my hon. Friend has extensive knowledge in this area, and I seek to reassure him that the Government recognise the vital role that clinical academics play in research and education in the NHS. Although universities are independent and therefore responsible for decisions on pay, we are committed to working closely with education partners to ensure that clinical academia remains an attractive career choice for all, including students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
The new Pears medical school at the University of Cumbria and the Lancaster University medical school, among others, are struggling to recruit and retain medical academic staff, in no small part due to the last Government’s somewhat masochistic decision to undermine one of Britain’s best exports: namely, the income we receive from overseas students. Will the Minister undo this nonsense and allow Britain’s brilliant universities, especially the medical schools, to help boost the quest for economic growth?
Students are incredibly important to our universities, and we have some world-leading universities. I will ask my hon. Friend in the other place to respond to the hon. Gentleman’s question.
Mike Tapp (Dover and Deal) (Lab)
Labour’s plan for change will get a record share of children ready for school, hitting key developmental targets by the age of five. Family hubs will play a crucial part in that. We are investing £69 million in family hubs, targeting support where the money will make the biggest difference to children’s life chances.
Mike Tapp
In Deal, Blossom children’s centre has been closed, and the new merged service does not offer the level of service required for one to four-year-olds and is not fit for purpose. What can be done to reopen that much-loved and sorely missed community asset?
Local authorities must engage with families to co-design services and ensure that those services meet their needs. We are investing £126 million in family hubs, Start for Life, and through our plan for change. This Government aim to get a record proportion of children hitting key developmental targets by the age of five. If my hon. Friend would like to write to me on any particular issue, I would be happy to take it up. Departmental officials are aware of the case he raises and are working with Kent county council to continue to deliver services.
Does the Minister wish to answer that question, because it is definitely not linked?
I assure the hon. Member that the Secretary of State has had such conversations and will continue to do so.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
The Government have a mission to break down barriers to opportunity, and we want to rebalance opportunities in favour of young people who have the most to gain from apprenticeships. Where starts have fallen by almost 40%, we are introducing foundation apprenticeships to give more young people a foot in the door at the start of their working life.
Laura Kyrke-Smith
We are fortunate to have some great apprenticeship providers in Aylesbury, such as the Buckinghamshire College Group and Buckinghamshire New University. When I joined pupils from the Grange school at their careers fair, I saw at first hand their excitement about the apprenticeship options on offer. We know that apprenticeships are a win-win for young people and for sectors facing recruitment challenges, such as health and social care and construction. What steps is the Minister taking to expand and strengthen apprenticeships, and to ensure that all young people who choose to go down that route are able to do so?
My hon. Friend is a real champion for students at Buckinghamshire colleges, and indeed for young people across Aylesbury. I know the area she represents very well. After the Conservatives left us with a collapsing apprenticeship system and other skills shortages, Labour is listening to employers and redrawing the system through Skills England, a new growth and skills levy and new foundation apprenticeships. That is how we will unlock opportunity and drive growth.
Ian Roome
Back in the autumn, the new Government announced plans to reduce the financial support available for level 7 apprenticeships. Does the Secretary of State understand that curtailing higher-level apprenticeships will make it harder to access graduate-level skills and qualifications in rural areas such as North Devon, where there are no universities nearby?
The Government have an extremely challenging fiscal inheritance and tough choices need to be taken on how funding should be prioritised to generate opportunities for all. Employers will still be able to offer and invest in level 7 apprenticeships where they feel they provide a good return on investment. We have taken advice from Skills England, which engages with employers on funding for level 7 apprenticeships, over the autumn. The Department expects to make a final decision on affected apprenticeships shortly.
The Government have said in answer to written questions that they have a forecast for the number of apprenticeships but that they will not publish it for Members to see, which is a shame. At the last oral questions, the Secretary of State said it was still the Government’s policy to allow employers to spend 50% of their apprenticeship levy money on other things. Is not the reason the Government will not publish their forecast for the number of apprenticeships that their policy will lead to a sharp reduction in the number of people starting apprenticeships?
We are very confident about what the Government are doing with apprenticeships. Our levy-funded growth and skills offer, with apprenticeships at the heart, will deliver greater flexibility for learners and employers in England, aligned with our industrial strategy, creating routes into good skilled jobs in growing industries. As a first step, that will include shorter duration and foundation apprenticeships in targeted sectors.
Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)
Independent training providers are an important part of the post-16 education landscape. They are funded to deliver the training that employers and learners need. That supports our plan for a youth guarantee to ensure that every young person can earn and learn. Springfield Training contributes to that effort, governed by our contractual relationship with commercial providers.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
When I worked at the University of Salford, I was proud to be part of the revolution in higher degree apprenticeships that saw thousands of people finding new technical careers following higher education. With unemployment rising and with recruitment agencies reporting significant reductions in job postings as companies squeeze their payroll following the Government’s national insurance increases, what new measures are the Government taking to protect apprenticeship levels in this economic climate?
After the Conservatives left us with a collapsing apprenticeship system as well as skills shortages, Labour has listened to employers and is redrawing the system through Skills England, a new growth and skills levy and new foundation apprenticeships.
Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)
To insulate our homes and build the 1.5 million we need, we will need far more construction workers—about 1 million over the next decade. What steps are we taking on apprenticeships and training to ensure that we have the construction workers we need?
We are working across Government with the sector to put in place training schemes to build up the next generation of installers, including new apprenticeships for retrofit co-ordinators and installation technicians. As I mentioned, we have also established Skills England, which will form a coherent national picture of skill gaps and how they can be addressed.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
I recently visited a school in my constituency in a building that is hundreds of years old. Its school condition allocation does not cover the work needed to keep the school warm, safe and up to date. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that classrooms in older buildings are fitted out?
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
Millmead children’s centre in my constituency helps young people achieve their early learning goals and provides safeguarding services, and it has been doing so with deprived families for many years, yet although Kent county council has been given £4 million to protect family hubs, it is not protecting those services. Will the Minister explain to Kent county council that it should be finding the money for this vital service?
I thank my hon. Friend for raising her concern so passionately. We are aware that Kent county council is taking the necessary steps to best meet the needs of families, and will continue to provide family hub services from existing alternative sites nearby. That said, I am happy to meet her to discuss the matter further.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
Wokingham borough council often struggles to find schools, including specialist schools, that can meet the needs of SEND pupils. As a result, many children are receiving education other than at school, or are reliant on alternative provision. Even so, there are often instances in which some needs identified in the EHCP are not met. Will the Minister—
(1 year, 1 month 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.
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
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 year, 2 months 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 year, 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
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 year, 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
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 year, 2 months 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.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
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 year, 2 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
This 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.
Lincoln Jopp
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.
Anneliese Midgley (Knowsley) (Lab)
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.
Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)
Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)
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.
Alice Macdonald
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.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
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.
Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
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?