Future Skills Programmes: Universities
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey(1 month, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster 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
Ed Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered Government support for future skills programmes at universities.
It is really a pleasure to speak in your presence, Sir Desmond. I also thank the Minister, who knows that my aim in this debate is to give the Government a present—a present in the form of an idea that would revolutionise higher education, boost skills across our economy and be an engine of real growth. But it is more than that; it is an idea that could enhance the quality of life of millions of people, as it is also about social mobility and social justice—equality of opportunity in action. It is an idea that has already been fully and professionally researched, with thousands of businesses across the UK inputting into the completed research. This well researched idea has also been piloted and tested on real, live students. Moreover, it is an idea in its third year of practical roll-out. This is happening now, and it is being fully evaluated as it is put into action. It is a present that is, shall we say, oven ready.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I commend the right hon. Member for bringing forward the debate. I was saying beforehand that Queen’s University in Belfast is already doing this. It runs these online skills courses and programmes, through shadowing and other incentives. Does the right hon. Member agree that greater Government support could only help even more students to give those few hours per semester to achieve greater personal growth and better foundational skills—the very objective that he is trying to achieve?
Ed Davey
It is always a pleasure to take an intervention from the hon. Gentleman, but I am going to push back a little bit, because I do not think any university is doing what Kingston University is doing—it might be partially —so I hope that he will listen to the rest of my remarks.
I think that this idea can be rolled out across England and, indeed, the whole UK and that it has the potential to help our schools, too. If that is not enough to intrigue and interest the Minister, I am not sure what is, but here is the icing on the cake: it will not cost very much. I hope I have got the Minister’s attention now. It is an idea that is very affordable. I am super-proud to say that this idea has been researched, developed, piloted, tested and rolled out in the fabulous university in my constituency—Kingston University.
I am about to unwrap this present, but in advance of the reveal, let me be clear that I have one main, simple ask of the Minister today. Please can she or her ministerial colleagues come to Kingston University to hear more from the academics involved, but above all to listen to the inspiring students who are already benefiting? And please come soon, before decisions are made in the spending review later this year, because I think students across the country can benefit from this.
Here is the present. Kingston University has developed a programme that it calls Future Skills, with the future skills being ones identified by business through a major research programme. There are nine skills in all. They are creative problem solving, digital competency including AI, adaptability, having a questioning mindset, empathy, collaboration, being enterprising, resilience, and self-awareness—something we could all do with in this House. The Minister will recognise, I hope, that these are essential life skills, but they are rarely taught, at least not directly. There is no undergraduate course with all these skills in the curriculum, yet they are the future skills that businesses say they want people to have.
Some people in other higher education institutions might say, “Well, we do that. We teach those skills, but in other ways. There’s nothing special to see here.” They would be wrong. Kingston University has developed modules for all these skills and insists that every single undergraduate takes these modules, whatever their main subject. They might be studying engineering or fashion—Kingston University, by the way, is in the top five in the UK, and is top in London, for fashion and textiles; I thought I would just get that in. They might be studying computer science or cyber-security, or nursing. Whatever the degree, students at Kingston University now study these nine future skills as well. What is more, Kingston University has structured the teaching of these future skills across three years of undergraduate study in phases called navigate, explore and apply. A first-year undergraduate will experience those future skills in a programme called navigate, which is designed to support the student’s transition into university life. It involves workshops that show that these future skills are not abstract but real skills with huge significance.
These workshops help students to navigate how they match up to the skills already. Are they naturally empathetic? Have they mastered AI? Are they good at collaboration and problem-solving? I guess the first-year undergraduate experience of the navigate phase of future skills could be described as self-assessment, where the student is offered relevant guidance and learning resources to develop all those skills. That first-year navigate phase was rolled out, after testing, for all Kingston University students in September 2023, reaching 5,300 students this academic year.
This September’s Kingston freshers will be the third cohort to experience navigate and future skills. Students in their second year take future skills forward in a phase called explore. That involves students working directly with employers to build their knowledge of these future skills and an understanding of what they mean in practice. They do that in a variety of ways: in mock assessment centres and live projects, and through placements and site visits. Some people would say they do that already, but they do not.
Explore has been tested for two years and rolled out for one. The full second year of Kingston students have been experiencing explore from last September, reaching more than 4,400 students. To take one example, an exercise developed with the John Lewis Partnership focused on Waitrose. Waitrose worked with Kingston students on actual questions and challenges that the business is facing, working with 600 second-year students from the university’s faculty of business and social science and the faculty of engineering, computing and the environment to help them to solve real problems.
Students are devising a system to make it easier for Waitrose to capture and interpret data from its suppliers. Other students are shaping a business-to-business marketing communications strategy for Waitrose to encourage suppliers to adopt appropriate use of artificial intelligence to support data insight.
Carer’s Allowance
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey(5 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I commend the right hon. Gentleman for his endeavours in the debate, which we support, and on his compassion for carers given his own experience. Someone who cares for their parents all day and then works a couple of hours in the evening is precluded from receiving carer’s allowance. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that those people, who do not get carer’s allowance because they happen to work a few hours, should qualify?
Ed Davey
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that point. That should certainly be part of the review, but one or two other issues, which I will talk about, are critical to reform probably even before that.
At just £81.90 a week, carer’s allowance is the lowest benefit of its kind. For someone doing 35 hours of caring a week—the minimum period for eligibility—that is just £2.34 an hour. It is not just the low rate of the carer’s allowance that worries me but the fact that the eligibility rules are inflexible and very badly designed, chief among them being the earnings limit of £151 a week. Even for someone on minimum wage, that is just 13 hours and 20 minutes a week. The earning limit operates like a cliff edge. As soon as someone makes £151.01 a week, they lose the whole carer’s allowance—every penny of the £81.90. It acts as a significant barrier and a major disincentive to work. It means carers on low incomes cannot work a bit more to help make ends meet, so it is bad for them, bad for the person they are caring for, bad for their employers and bad for the economy.
But here is where things get worse. There are tens of thousands of carers who go slightly over the earnings limit, mostly without realising it. Maybe they pick up an extra shift, happen to get an end-of-year bonus, or understandably do not realise the way carer’s allowance operates in such a daft way. Even though the Department for Work and Pensions gets regular alerts from His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs when people go over the earnings limit, it has not been telling carers and it keeps paying carer’s allowance until one day, out of the blue, the carer gets hit with demands to repay those overpayments, which may have built up over months and years due to the DWP’s own inaction.
Back in July, I told the Prime Minister about one of my constituents, Andrea, who lives in Chessington. She is a full-time carer for her mum. Back in 2019, Andrea decided to go back to work part-time in a charity shop—mainly for her mental health, she told me. She informed the DWP at the time and it continued her payments. Five years later, it wrote to her and said that no, she now had to repay £4,600. Andrea says she feels “harassed, bullied and overwhelmed.” She now does just six hours’ unpaid work a month to avoid going over the earnings limit and getting into more debt. She says the whole thing makes her “want to give up work and give up caring.”
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey
Mr Davey
My hon. Friend is right to say that we face a big investment challenge in this country. That is why, in the Gracious Speech, Her Majesty announced that we would be legislating for electricity market reforms to bring forward that investment, but at the lowest possible cost.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
People have real concerns about energy prices. They also have real concerns about the amalgamation of energy companies—be they electricity, gas or oil companies—and the control of prices that results from that. What assurances can the Minister give us that the Government will always be the protector of prices for the consumer?
Mr Davey
The hon. Gentleman is right. Energy bills are a real concern for many households around the country. That is why we are taking the action we are. He refers to consolidation in the sector. That certainly happened under the last Government. What we are doing is trying to make sure we can get more competition into the sector. We have seen Ofgem’s proposals for dealing with liquidity in the wholesale markets, while the work I am leading on collective switching is intended to enable consumers to generate more competition. Competition is what we want to see.
Cost of Living
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey(12 years, 10 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Davey
I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport will touch on those issues. This Government have done far more on petrol duty than the previous Government did. However, I will not pretend that we can isolate ourselves from world oil prices—the hon. Gentleman will know how high the price of oil has gone internationally.
We will do everything we can to insulate consumers from such price spikes. That is why, as stated in Her Majesty’s Gracious Speech, the Government will introduce legislation to reform the electricity market. The measures in the forthcoming energy Bill will ensure that we have secure, reliable low-carbon electricity supplies. We want to build a diverse portfolio of clean-energy technologies, including nuclear, renewables, clean coal and gas, and let them compete on cost.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
Is the Secretary of State aware of the proposed 15% increase in gas prices? There is much talk about the increase in oil prices and other prices, but gas prices are also going to cause real hurt. What steps can the Government take to help those who have gas as their sole source of energy?
Mr Davey
The hon. Gentleman is right to say that there are people predicting that wholesale gas prices will go up later this year. We had the announcement from Centrica last week, and we also had the announcement from E.ON. I am sure that other providers will be competing on price. However, I have already laid out some of the measures that we have been taking, whether it is the discussions that we had with the energy providers on gas and electricity bills, the collective switching or the work that Ofgem is doing on tariff simplification. All those measures make up quite a strong package to try to help the constituents he has just mentioned.
Returning to the energy Bill, there are four parts to our reforms: new long-term supply contracts to provide stable incentives to invest in low-carbon electricity generation; a capacity mechanism to ensure that we can keep the lights on; an emissions performance standard to keep carbon emissions from new fossil fuel plants down; and a carbon price floor to give investors certainty to commit capital to low-carbon projects. These reforms will attract the investment that we need to secure our electricity supplies. The investment will bring real rewards: up to 250,000 jobs in the construction and operation of new power plants, 19 GW of new electricity capacity, and an energy system that is fit for the future.
This is one of the biggest delivery programmes that this Government will oversee. It will stimulate growth, support new skilled jobs, upgrade our ageing energy infrastructure and bring down consumer energy bills. Our latest analysis shows that over the next two decades the average household energy bill will be 4% lower than if we did nothing. If we do not act now, we face a higher risk of blackouts and more exposure to price spikes, and higher consumer bills for both homes and businesses. That is not a future that this Government are willing to consider, so we will take the right decisions for the long term. The provisions in the forthcoming energy Bill will keep the lights on and our carbon emissions down, at the lowest cost to the consumer.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
Given the news the Minister has just given regarding the progression of energy production from onshore wind, can he assure us that wildlife migratory routes will not be inhibited by the establishment and development of wind energy production? I want to make sure that wildlife will not be harmed by energy provision and development measures.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey(13 years, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Davey
I am very grateful for my hon. Friend’s question. She will be aware that her constituents in this village share their concerns about postcode issues with many other residents in many other constituencies across the UK. I have raised this matter in the past with Royal Mail, and it believes that the costs of changing its systems would be disproportionate. Of course I will raise her point, but I do not want to raise her expectations.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
The responsibility to promote adult and community learning in Northern Ireland is a devolved matter. Has the Minister considered linking with Northern Ireland’s Department for Employment and Learning to provide a strategy for the mutual benefit of both the UK mainland and Northern Ireland?
Postal Services Bill
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey
Mr Davey
The reason why I am not agreeing to the hon. Gentleman’s kind invitation is that, under legislation that has been on the statute books for many years, and based on the practice of the previous Government, Post Office Ltd decides where Post Office “locals” open, so if that is his request he needs to address it to Post Office Ltd managers.
Jim Shannon
Hon. Members have referred to the pilots, but has there been a UK-wide pilot, or any in Scotland or Northern Ireland? If there has, could we have some idea of the feedback from them?
Mr Davey
There have been Post Office “locals” pilots in all parts of the country. We are up to 80 local schemes, and Post Office Ltd has tried to pilot them in urban, rural, suburban and urban-deprived areas. It is trying to test them out over time, taking account of seasonality and cash flow, so we are learning an awful lot of lessons from them. The recent analysis of the “locals” project by Consumer Focus is publicly available, and although it has some concerns about privacy it was able to show that on issues such as access, longer opening hours and reduced queues, people have found the projects to be a beneficial step forward.
The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) said that he was concerned about the universal service obligation and worried that the Bill would undermine it. Far from it: one of the Bill’s main objectives is to secure the universal service, and Opposition Members have failed to realise that clause 30 includes stronger protections for the universal service than was previously the case.
The hon. Member for Angus (Mr Weir) made a very informed speech. He was a distinguished member of the Public Bill Committee, who failed to attend only on the few occasions when the weather prevented him from flying down to London, but in looking at the amendments before us I have to say that he has made the mistake of calling for guaranteed business for the post office network and, almost, of wanting to keep things in aspic.
On the train down to the annual meeting of the National Federation of SubPostmasters, I read the federation’s account of its 100-year history, which mentions the concerns that existed when telegrams were being phased out, and when postal orders were used. In other words, the business and services that have gone through our post office network have changed hugely, and we have had to develop them and move on, so setting things in aspic—putting things in the Bill, as some Members want—would not help.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Jim Shannon and Ed Davey(14 years ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Davey
When we publish the Bill, the hon. Gentleman will see that we wish to have a reserve power for the adjudicator on penalties, but there is also a real case to be made for the adverse publicity that large supermarkets would face if they breached the groceries supply code of practice.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
Last week we had a debate in Westminster Hall on the pig industry, and Members indicated clearly that if there was no immediate action to restore the balance between supermarkets’ profits and the profitability of farmers, many farmers would go out of business. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that that does not happen?
Mr Davey
I may have to refer the hon. Gentleman to Ministers in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, who are obviously responsible for agriculture. We should be clear that the groceries code adjudicator will not be a price regulator—that has never been proposed. It will be there to enforce the groceries supply code of practice. That is very important, because it is in the interests not just of the producers and farmers who supply the large supermarkets but of consumers.