Government Record on Education, Employment and Welfare

Lord Addington Excerpts

Thursday 16th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, I am afraid I could have predicted some of the lines of this debate. Indeed, in the first speech, we heard the noble Baroness, Lady Evans, saying how dreadful everything is. The response from the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, reminded me of a guard dog having its tail stood on. He went back, justifiably, because what have we got here? We have the Government doing what Governments always do: reacting to what has happened before.

Although we can say wonderful things about various bits of the education system, there are things that did not go right. The first report I received was about off-rolling—a wonderful product of the academy system, where everybody goes out and passes more exams but we also have fewer people in education. That was in 2020, before Covid. The report brought forward by the noble Lord, Lord Johnson of Marylebone, titled Requires Improvement: Urgent Change for 11–16 Education, looks at further education and the fact that, once again, the system is overly academic. There were problems that came with the academisation programme and things that were not embraced. The first one was that not everybody is good at passing exams, yet they were being told, in a very loud voice, “No, that is what matters”.

We need to start to address that in the education programme and in the preparation for what comes next, which for many people is further education. There is an agreement, possibly going back to new Labour, that we put too much emphasis on universities, or that universities stopped doing level 4 and level 5 courses. Let us face it: some of the new universities came from a world where they successfully did this and it was dumped. We all have our history to deal with here. The noble Lord, Lord Baker, has a solution, as he always does. It is one that we have probably not totally mined to get the best out of it, but it is certainly one way forward: making sure that we take on further education and up its status. There is also a degree of agreement that we have not done that properly.

Having said that, my questions to the Government now come thick and fast. Aside from what the Government are doing to recruit 6,500 more teachers, what are they doing about getting all those teachers who have left the industry back into it? What about re-recruitment? People who we invested in and trained have left in their droves; what are the Government doing to bring them back in? Have the Government looked at what would be required to make it more attractive to come back and teach? That is fundamental about this process.

I turn to educational needs—anybody who put money on me raising that have won, but they would not have got very good odds. I will reserve my comments on the remarks from the noble Baroness, Lady Spielman. We know that, for years and years, we have ignored and not recognised people who have special educational needs, and we have not found out who they are, in particular girls, who are very good at surviving in the classroom by masking, disappearing in the middle of it and not commenting. Most of the time, they get through without causing too much trouble. They underachieve dramatically in most cases, and have huge mental health problems and scars because of it, but they get through. On the other hand, boys typically—these are, of course, stereotypes—kick off at the back of the class, get thrown out, and get sent to the pupil referral unit. Not long ago, it was confirmed to me that every child in a pupil referral unit is expected to have at least one special educational need.

We have not dealt with this. It was accepted as part of the previous Government’s and the coalition Government’s reforms. Maybe I should not have acquired so many scars on my tongue and the inside of my mouth from not speaking at the time—although maybe some people think I should have acquired a few more. If we are not going to address this historical lag on this historical pressure that has pushed people outside then we are going to have trouble. We have trouble, but we are going to have more. I hope that the Minister will be able to tell me exactly when we are going to get a practical system of support in schools. As I have mentioned on other occasions, we can then take it as read that certain groups will be very difficult to deal with in schools. We will need a mixed economy.

I remind the House that I am chairman of Microlink PC, which works in assistive technology; that I am president of the British Dyslexia Association; and that I am dyslexic myself. What are we going to do to make sure that those people who have traditionally failed are allowed to get through? We had a great emphasis on passing English and maths. Great: we have taken one group, possibly the biggest group, and put an extra load right on the back of their necks. We have said, “You will not go to the next stage because you’ve failed”. There have been exemptions: the children of the middle classes who can get the diagnosis and have the tiger parent to advocate for them get something out of it, but those who do not come from exam-passing backgrounds do not. I hope that the Minister can give us some practical guidance on how the teachers who we are short of, and who we are trying to recruit, will be better capable of spotting and putting in fairly easily administered support structures.

Let us use assistive technology to allow dyslexics to deliver in English in a format that someone can get around. Voice recognition is a standard factor in every computer that has been given to any Member of this House or the other. It is there with the push of a couple of buttons; I can show people how it works. It is also on every mobile phone, hence why I have one or two caveats about the “demon of mobile phones”. What are we doing there?

Then you can go on to other groups, such as those with dyscalculia; with the noble Baroness, Lady Bull, sitting on the Woolsack, I would be a fool not to mention them. We need to think about how we are going to identify, help and support other groups. These people are at their most vulnerable. They will get stopped by an education system that says, “Pass an exam”, and will have to go down a secondary route. People know when they are branded as stupid and they carry it with them for the rest of their lives. I was very lucky; I had that tiger parent. If the Government do not address this properly, they will guarantee the existence of a group of people who will find it increasingly difficult to get employed.

To be perfectly honest, upping any taxation threshold that falls directly on employment is not the best and smartest move in the world to get people out and into the marketplace. That has not helped, but if we are looking for a high-skilled, high-value workforce then we have to start to address those problems and get people ready for that world. Everything is changing. “We do not even know what will be required” is the average recruitment strategy. At the moment, whether it is a bump due to fear or something else, it looks like that the undergraduate route is not going to work any more and it comes with debts. The big question we should all be asking is: what are the Government going to do about accessibility to good further education? Unless we come away with a series of answers and strategies, we will let down that big group who do not find the academic system that easy to access and are not going to succeed at the top end but still have an expectation of being prepared for the field of work. I hope that the Minister starts to answer these questions today. Although these questions were not invented two years ago, the current Government have the responsibility for finding coherent answers.

Contemporary Cultural Boycotts

Lord Addington Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Grand Committee

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, this subject is one of those where you suddenly think, “Yes, there shouldn’t be any form of cancellation”—here, primarily on grounds of antisemitism. I have always felt it to be rather absurd that the Abrahamic religions attack each other over which day they pray on, given that half the time they are all referring to similar texts, but let us go into this issue in further detail.

I turn to the recommendations in the report. It admits that it is not the most scientific of structures but, still, questions around taking on the law and training for organisations have been asked. It says that on page 6. What are the Government going to do to make sure that there are training schemes? I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Fox, is not a fan of them; we have clashed on this in the past. We need to go through this and have a look at what we are doing to make sure that there is knowledge of the legal duties going forward, because that seems to be the issue here. The question of whether you are breaking the law if you do not allow somebody to do something that is legal and is not threatening somebody else seems to be the real question here.

Let us remember that, although one organisation may be under pressure now, another one will be tomorrow. Other groups have been cancelled and other people have been pressured. Things have changed. Look at our own society: we have Protestants and Catholics—I speak as somebody whose background is half from the west coast of Scotland. These are real issues. What are the Government doing about making sure that the people in charge know what their duty is? That is very important here. If we cannot stop unpleasant attitudes going out in society, at least we can let people know what the legal frameworks and duties are. Surely that is the least the Government should be doing at this point.

Public Sector Productivity

Lord Addington Excerpts

Wednesday 9th October 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, I will probably be talking on the micro-scale here. What brought me to this debate about efficiency in the public sector was the role that the public sector has in getting the best out of disabled workers. In raising that, I have to declare a couple of interests. I am dyslexic, and I am president of the British Dyslexia Association. Much more importantly, I am chairman of Microlink PC, an assistive technology company, and it is my experience in that role that I will try to bring to the debate.

The one big thing we have found about getting the best out of workers with disabilities or long-term sickness is that people have to intervene fast. In the modern world, if you do not intervene fast you will have an inefficient worker—or somebody who is inefficient in their current role—possibly being promoted into a role that they cannot cope with, due to their disability. The manager of that worker will ask, “Why aren’t you performing?”, and they will reply, “Because I’ve got this role here”. The manager will then say, “Prove it, or I don’t know what to do”. That is a conflict situation, which can ultimately end up in court, or in losing that worker, who will then have to be replaced. In the banking sector, where we have worked with clients such as HSBC and Lloyds, it costs about £80,000 to replace someone. We had a system of providing quick intervention, at the cost of about £1,000 per head, to make sure that such a person was working properly. About 2% to 3% of areas presented with this problem, and we could achieve results by having an expert go down and deal with them.

We may wonder why everybody is not doing that. It goes back to the line manager who does not have the support or knowledge to deal with the disabled worker. I have had a look at some of the Civil Service information. It says that line managers should know about this, and talks about a disability awareness passport, or something like that. It talks about glasses—the one technical adjustment that more or less all of us use here, which means I will not dig out the piece of paper. Line managers are being asked to understand all the disabilities: dyslexia, back pain, rheumatoid arthritis, ADHD, you name it—all of them; it is a combination. How can we expect a line manager to do all that, and to do it efficiently? We cannot. It is asking the impossible.

Get the experts in, and get them in fast, to make sure that the disabled worker is supported and recognised. If they are, they will then start to tell people what is needed, and there can be an interaction. If that does not happen, and they are just told to work hard or else action will be taken against them, there will be conflict. Conflict ends up in costs and inefficiency. And remember the people around this conflict: how can they function properly with that going on?

If the public sector is to manage and help disabled workers, and if line managers are expected have the information I mentioned and was worried about—people are saying that it should be done, so there is an acceptance that doing something helps—please let there be a structure in which people can go to an expert. If they can get to an expert who can tell them what to do, they can have a solution, and fast. That is what is required here. At the moment we have a situation that invites litigation and delay. I am sure everybody would agree that we should be looking for the quickest and easiest solution. That is also the cheapest solution, and we get a productive worker out of it.

Horseracing and Bloodstock Industries

Lord Addington Excerpts

Monday 29th July 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The Government entirely recognise the importance of the horseracing industry but also of the horserace betting levy to the industry and to the financial sustainability of the sport, which, as the noble Lord rightly states, contributes a considerable amount to the economy. I would be very happy to meet him to discuss the topic further and understand his views on the issue.

[Lord Addington (LD)]

My Lords, could the Government go a little further when it comes to things such as the levy, when remembering that the vast majority of people who work in racing are doing so on something like the living wage? They are undertaking an activity that is often physically dangerous. A half-tonne of fight-or-flight response animal can take a fairly heavy toll on the human body in many circumstances. Can the Government make sure that they look at something so that this workforce is properly protected and supported?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

The Government are committed to making sure that the sector is sustainable, but I would be interested in discussing further with the noble Lord the issues that he raises. We are committed to making sure that the levy is administered efficiently to best support racing. It is too soon for me to commit to the shape of future policy.