Apprenticeships (Small Businesses) Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLaura Sandys
Main Page: Laura Sandys (Conservative - South Thanet)Department Debates - View all Laura Sandys's debates with the Department for Education
(13 years, 5 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
There is a lot in that idea because the concept of working towards and developing a skill—in the old days, a craft—and a profession has been lost. The idea of sticking with something and staying with it until a body of knowledge has been achieved or a degree of experience or skill has been acquired has been lost over the years. I remember very clearly my father’s small card showing that he was a master plumber. The importance of both an organisation’s and a young person’s commitment perhaps ought to be recognised more formally.
We all welcome the Government’s drive to increase the number of apprenticeship places, particularly in areas of unacceptably high youth unemployment—for example, Bradford. In a couple of the wards in my constituency, one in eight young people are not in education, employment or training, and they are desperately in need of some sort of future. It is perhaps unfashionable in some quarters to defend one of the schemes that is still in operation but on its last legs: the future jobs fund. However, I want to talk about the importance of what has been described by others as getting people ready for apprenticeships and making sure that young people are employable in the view of those who wish to take on apprentices.
We need to be very careful not to throw away the baby with the bathwater. The future jobs fund in Bradford got off to a poor, bureaucratic and frustratingly slow start, but it did become a success, particularly with categories of young people who struggled to get into apprenticeships. It was successful both in getting young people into work and in giving them the skills and the work experience that it was hoped would help to them into employment long into the future. More than half of young people on future jobs fund placements in Bradford did not return to benefits after 28 weeks. They found some sort of career progression after, in many cases, pretty difficult young lives. A major criticism of the future jobs fund has been that a high proportion of jobs were created in the public sector but, in Bradford, around 75% of the placements were in the voluntary or community sector. That is big society at its very best.
I should like to mention the Thorpe Edge project. As you will know, Mr Davies, that is a community furniture project that had 13 future jobs fund placements over a period of years. It was apparent that, for some of the young people on that project, getting out of bed before lunch was an achievement, let alone having an apprenticeship where they were expected to arrive at half-past 8 and work through until the leaving time that night for five days a week. The people on that project were fortunate because those who were responsible for running it had experience of dealing with young people in a difficult area. If someone on an apprenticeship did not turn up at 8.30 am and perhaps came in at 10 am, they would have probably lost their job. However, through their knowledge of the young person concerned, Thorpe Edge project supervisors knew that the young person concerned probably came from a background where there was a lone parent or the person concerned was on drugs or suffered from alcohol abuse. In such circumstances, simply getting into work at all was an achievement. By providing intensive support and help for some of those young people, the programme allowed them to get into college or employment.
The focus of my comments is on those people who simply will not get those apprenticeships, however many placements we manage to generate and however many placements the Government are willing to fund. Additional apprenticeships certainly offer a good alternative to the future jobs fund or schemes of that kind in many cases, but there is space for both types of programme. We need schemes that benefit people who are employable and who will do well out of placements and people who would struggle to get on to apprenticeships at all.
There is clearly a supply-side problem in many economies. I hope that the Minister will set out some of the measures that can be used to address the shortage of apprenticeship placements. A scheme in Bradford with the local social housing provider in communities recently received more than 600 applications for just seven apprenticeship places. Evidently, demand is massively outstripping supply.
Other hon. Members have raised all sorts of issues about the barriers and why businesses are not willing to take on apprenticeships, whether because of bureaucracy and red tape—we have mentioned some of those issues—or because of a lack of awareness of apprenticeships, as hon. Members said earlier. Many people who have been in business for years might never even have considered offering an apprenticeship. We need to consider what is happening in the schools and through the careers advice service. We also need to recognise that in some communities, certainly for small businesses, cost is an issue. We need to bear that in mind.
The Federation of Small Businesses has been quoted a lot with regard to the implications for small businesses. I understand that the Government have decided not to extend an apprenticeship grant for employers that provided some time-limited financial support for businesses. We still need to consider that as necessary for certain businesses, particularly small businesses, and in certain economies with high unemployment and a small number of available opportunities.
Let us not forget that although businesses receive 50% for post-19 and a full 100% for pre-19—I understand that that might be extended in some cases—they still have to pay for the young person. For many small businesses in particular, that is identified as being the most important cost. An FSB survey identified that it is simply too costly to take on. Of all the reasons why they were not taking on apprentices, the fact that it was just too costly came out top.
An FSB survey on skills identified that 66% of businesses said that, with the right measures in place, they would take on an apprentice. Those measures include a financial incentive for taking on an apprentice, greater clarity in terms of Government contributions to wage and training costs, and a separate body, interestingly, to manage the payroll costs. That has to be a way forward for many of our young people.
For 20-odd years, I worked in a university. We have heard some comments about university today. I agree that it was wrong to specify a 50% target. For many young people, the message was that if they do not get to university they have failed, and that closed up a lot of options. I also have tell hon. Members that, as someone who worked in a university for nearly 25 years in total, many young people, especially towards the end, were there because they did not know where else to be. They were there to find themselves and to delay a decision. They were there to gain something—a qualification, which they hoped would be useful—but also to defer a judgment on what they should do with their lives.
Does the hon. Gentleman think that those young people found themselves after the three years they were under his stewardship? The fundamental issue, brought up by many hon. Members, is that we do not start to talk about the world of work early enough. Many hon. Members have said that there is an issue about education and schools. I have never been impressed by the careers system and careers officers across the board, either in my era or now. Does the hon. Gentleman have any greater sense of confidence in the careers system that mentors our young people?
There are measures to improve the system. It has failed in many instances. On getting information through to young people, I would add that the most important individuals for many young people as they go through their education—a blinding flash of the obvious—are the teachers, not the careers advisers. How many teachers have any experience of life outside of a school, whether in manufacturing, engineering or not being a teacher?
I am concerned that we miss a trick if we focus on developing the careers advisory service, recognising that it is a weak area that we could develop, without looking at the crucial issue of the experiences of the most influential characters in our young people’s education—the teachers themselves. Perhaps the Minister has something on that—it may not be his remit, I do not know—but exchanges between business and schools are important. When young people consider what they want to do with their lives, they should be surrounded by people who have experience of something other than going to university or being in another educational setting.
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Davies. I begin by congratulating, and not just in the customary way, the hon. Member for Gloucester (Richard Graham) on bringing an extraordinarily important subject to the Chamber today. His speech had depth and breadth; it was extremely expansive and dealt with many of the most important points. It is inevitable that the general approach we take to apprenticeships is concentrated on the challenge we face in dealing with apprenticeships in small and medium-sized businesses. Whether we call them micro-businesses, sole traders or people who are starting out on their own, the issue is magnified in that area. The hon. Gentleman has therefore done the House and the Chamber a service by the breadth of his remarks.
The hon. Gentleman talked about apprenticeships not being to do with manufacturing alone, which is true, and under the previous Government that diversification of apprenticeships, which is continuing, was important. The current Government have inherited that rising curve in apprenticeships, taken by the previous Labour Government from a base of 65,000 in 1997. The occasion is not one for trading loads of statistics or being partisan, but it is incumbent on Members to remember that the abolition of Train to Gain released to the present Government a significant amount of money, some of which they have chosen to use in the expansion of apprenticeships, which we welcome. The challenge for all of us, in whatever position, is to ensure that the expansion of apprenticeships is a success and continues.
It is important to look at the elements of policy continuity and, in particular, I pay tribute to the Minister for how he and his colleagues have continued to support Unionlearn. The routes into apprenticeship are many and varied, and we have heard today about some of those ways and how some can be improved. Undoubtedly, one of the best ways of persuading people into apprenticeships or taking up skills at whatever age is the support, endorsement and encouragement of their peers. In that respect, the work of Unionlearn has a great deal to teach us, whether or not we are talking about unionised environments. In the same way, many of the contributions this afternoon, in particular the last one, have stressed the need for such a process to be understood across the board.
The challenge we face is the one given to us by the Federation of Small Businesses, with figures on numbers and take-up that people have quoted in some detail today. Small businesses are crucial to growth. The hon. Member for Gloucester talked about that, and about the importance of taking on GTAs. He and other Government Members were somewhat sceptical about the former future jobs fund, but although we live in a three-minute universe, they ought to remember that their own Chancellor announced in the Budget earlier this year what some of us might regard as a pale imitation of the future jobs fund. We wait to see how that carries through. The hon. Gentleman made a valuable point at the end of his speech about incentives. I was particularly interested in the idea of the graduation of incentives over a three-year period, which many of us are familiar with from commercial practice, not least in hiring builders, and there is a lot to be said for that.
I congratulate other Members who spoke this afternoon. The hon. Member for Burnley (Gordon Birtwistle) talked about the importance of peer endorsement in apprenticeships and about the problem with skilled manual workers. Again, that is not a new problem but one flagged up by successive Select Committees, and it was a key issue in the Leitch report, to which all parties subscribed.
The hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr Jones) raised issues about the careers service and the exposure of young people to the working environment, which is also important. Again, it is not a new issue. Some years ago, when I was a member of the Education and Skills Committee, we went to two places in the United States to look at training in schools, in Boston and North Carolina, which had good examples of training in units in a secondary school. In such a unit in North Carolina, most of the young people—very much from a blue-collar background—subsequently got jobs with the Bell Telephone Co., which had sponsored the unit. There are some lessons for us in that, with interesting echoes in such ideas of recent years as studio schools or the university technical colleges, of which Lord Baker has been such a strong advocate.
I was delighted to hear the contributions of the hon. Members for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) and for Bradford East (Mr Ward). The hon. Member for Wyre Forest was particularly interesting and illuminating on his experience with the space company, which, in terms of where apprenticeships can take someone, I have found replicated in my own neck of the woods; a large number of people in Blackpool work for British Aerospace in one capacity or another. His reminder that it is a good idea not to make a false comparator—either apprenticeships or universities—was valuable. Whatever the value of higher level apprenticeships in their own right, we ought to be putting far more emphasis on ensuring that universities accept and look at vocational qualifications, and take themselves through to that level.
It is always a great pleasure to hear the hon. Member for Bradford East, who is extremely knowledgeable and passionate in this area. I was glad to hear what he had to say about his experience of the future jobs fund. It is true that in many areas it was not simply public sector-led. The statistics for my area of Blackpool mirrored those given by the hon. Gentleman. I vividly remember visiting Blackpool football club where six young people had been taken on under the future jobs fund, giving a similar success story.
I make one more point lightly and in not too partisan a fashion: I hope that hon. Members will see that the previous Government never made a commitment to or objective of 50% of young people under the age of 30 going into university education. If we look at the detail, we see that it was about some form of training or further or higher education. I make that point and pass on, but I am proud of the work that the previous Labour Government did to bolster apprenticeships and the apprenticeship system, making them an attractive option for businesses of all sizes. As I said, the results speak for themselves.
We set up the National Apprenticeship Service in 2009, as a national body playing a key role in overseeing the apprenticeship programme, providing information to potential apprentices and helping to match them with employers. We also introduced national apprenticeship week. It is a pleasure to hear today from so many Members that they have taken advantage of the hook of that week—throughout the rest of the year as well—to promote apprenticeships in their own constituencies. It is a good opportunity for doing that.
In my constituency, in February this year, my local Blackpool newspaper, The Gazette, sponsored an apprenticeship drive across the Fylde. I spoke at the launch of the drive and supported it, and it reached the sort of target figures of 100 to 150 apprenticeships, to which reference has been made. In my work as a Member of Parliament, I have seen the success of apprenticeships not only for very large companies such as BAE Systems, but also for small and local organisations. The Blackpool Pleasure Beach has taken on a number of apprentices successfully, as have many construction firms, or the dental practice in my constituency that I visited this year, which has just taken on two apprentices.
Sometimes it is not easy for a Government of any hue to persuade small and medium-sized businesses to look at apprenticeships. I know that from my own experience of running a small business with eight employees for 12 years before I came into this place. I know, as no doubt do many hon. Members who have spoken, about the multiplicity of factors and pressures on small businesses when they are trying to decide what to do: cash flow, marketing, promotion, lease arrangements. The list gets longer every year.
Of course there must be a receptive environment for small businesses to take on apprentices, and they must believe that it is worth expending the time, but that raises big issues about the structure of apprenticeships, and whether they are sufficiently structured to be useful to and easily accessible by small and medium-sized businesses. I do not want to be misunderstood. I am not suggesting that we abandon the traditional apprenticeship structures to which the hon. Member for Bradford East rightly referred.
My father undertook a traditional apprenticeship for a large company, Crossley Brothers, which is sadly now less well known than it was. It was a major factor in the engineering world certainly into the 1960s, and to the present day. Such apprenticeships have their value, but we must also consider the new type of apprenticeship. There are big decisions to be made and discussions to have about the value or otherwise of a modular approach, about delivery of apprenticeships on the job rather than outside at a further education college, and so on. Such matters must be taken into account when considering what benefits will encourage small businesses to take on apprentices.
Despite the Government’s announced additional investment in apprenticeships, many businesses still believe that there are major deterrents. A City and Guilds survey—I was at its launch during national apprenticeship week earlier this year—showed that 80% of employers still believe that there are barriers to hiring apprentices, and one in five believe that the current economic climate makes it too risky to take on an apprentice. A couple of other statistics are relevant to what hon. Members have said today. Just under half of employers would be encouraged to have an apprentice if more Government funding were available per apprentice—whether that would be a deciding factor, of course, is always the key question—and 26% wanted the recruitment process to become simpler and less time-consuming.
Those statistics are interesting, and have been supplemented recently by a major survey of 500 employers across the board, not just SMEs, by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Its findings are interesting and specific, and slightly contradict what City and Guilds said, because they showed that two thirds of those not offering apprenticeships reported that it was inappropriate for their organisation. Again, the point about how to market apprenticeships and present them to companies comes to mind. One in six said that they were not offering apprenticeships because of a recruitment freeze, budget restraints or the economic climate. Interestingly—I am not saying that one side or the other has the last word—less than 5% said that they were put off by too much associated bureaucracy or insufficient public funding.
Whatever the case, major challenges must be overcome. It may be relevant to the example about the value of soft skills—I do not like referring to soft skills because that may suggest that they are not important; I prefer to call them enabling skills, but that is a matter of nomenclature—that the CIPD survey showed that apprentices were rated highly for enthusiasm, work ethic and presentation, but that their creativity, innovation, initiative and customer service skills were less impressive. There may be some messages there about the school system.
The statistics from the Federation of Small Businesses, as many hon. Members have said, are worrying for the reasons that have been described. It is particularly valuable that the FSB not only provides such data, but regularly monitors attitudes and feedback from its membership. I understand that the latest report is due out tomorrow, and it will be particularly interesting given the current fluid nature and uncertain prospects for growth. Similar statistics came from the CBI/EDI educational skills survey, which was published last month. It showed that apprenticeship growth is increasingly concentrated in large companies.
That is on a par with the Government’s need urgently to consider tailoring apprenticeships better towards the need of SMEs. It is a two-way process, which the Government must take on board and, with the National Apprenticeship Service, be alert to the changes and modifications that employers report. They must allow employees to complete the course-based elements of their apprenticeships. I do not exempt further education colleges from that process because, certainly in my neck of the woods, it is important, particularly when bringing in people who must do a lot of juggling with their work-life balance, that delivery of off-job apprenticeship course work is as close to their work or living place as possible.
I was pleased to welcome the Minister to my local further education college, Thanet college, which has been extremely helpful and important to me in the recruitment of an apprentice I have just taken on. FE colleges are embedded in their communities, and play an important role as ambassadors for the apprentice system. They support employers who may not understand the system effectively. Does the hon. Gentleman agree?
I absolutely agree. In my neck of the woods, Blackpool and The Fylde college has done sterling work in that area. There is sometimes an issue about colleges understanding the need to deliver some of their training closer to the workplace if possible and closer to the living space if possible of the people they are trying to reach.