Does the Skills Act go far enough in addressing the needs of learners?
No, I don't. It doesn’t really consider the needs of learners at all. It's almost entirely around the needs of employers. I think except for the lifelong loan entitlement, learners almost entirely absent from the act.
What employers want is, of course, an important question, but it's not the only question. And when we have a sort of national failure to bring through people with the right skills, then we've got to ask serious questions about why systems are failing learners. All of the changes from Covid, I think, are entirely missing from the bill. I fear that Local Skills Improvement Plans will be too narrow. I think they should involve employees, the Chambers of Commerce, but also colleges, independent providers, local mayors and so on. Then it would be a document that had much wider buy-in.
We've got a public sector and a private sector skills crisis and the Skills Act does nothing to address that. Most fundamentally of all, you've got a bill that doesn't consider apprenticeships. Increasing their numbers and so on should be the key tool and focus of skills policy. I feel it's a huge, missed opportunity.
How do you think the government should proceed with reforming qualifications at levels two and three?
I think the decision to not fund the level 2 business administration apprenticeship is a significant mistake. I think that a lot of organisations found it really did suit their needs. And if you're having an employer-led approach, then abandoning just about the most popular level two qualification seems a considerable misstep.
I think T Levels have got a role. I've been to see T Level provision and I think they're of value, but so far, the numbers doing them are very small. So, government needs some real humility about, yes, we understand students really like this new project, but until the numbers really increase, then they should be very careful about abolishing other programmes to make space for T Levels.
What do you think the government should be doing so providers can retain and recruit the best staff?
You can't get away from the fact that we've had 12 years of really substantial funding cuts and the slight improvement in colleges' funding position in the last two years is only a tiny step back up the mountain. Those cuts have had massive consequences for the quality and number of people who are making their living in the FE sector.
We've got a public sector and a private sector skills crisis and the Skills Act does nothing to address that
You are in a competitive marketplace, particularly for vocational courses. Not just with other providers, but with industry. So, we've seen a huge brain drain out of the FE sector in the last 12 years.
I think, you've got to have a strategic approach to further education, which recognises that we need to be able to attract people to come into, and stay, in the sector. If people have a strong sense that this is an area of real priority for government. That, as I believe, attracting more people into the sector is of national importance, and that it's an area that is going to be invested in, then that will help providers to attract and retain staff because it will be seen as an area that has a real future.
What do you think can be done to get more young people into education and employment and keep apprentices on their course?
I think the first thing we need to do is increase access to apprenticeships. Apprenticeships and traineeships are great routes to support young people into the world of work. Apprenticeships need to be available in every town, village, and city in the country. Which is partly about making sure that small businesses, as well as bigger businesses, can access funding for apprenticeships, are able to manage the bureaucracy, and are encouraged to take on apprenticeships.
The sense that has developed in the last few years that apprenticeships are mainly a big business thing. If you're not a levy payer, then you sort of seem excluded from the system to an extent.
I think you need to have an approach to lifelong learning and adult education that really recognises the value of it and sets out to encourage people to do that. The name ‘Lifelong Loan Entitlement,’ I think, is a bad one. I get a strong sense of resistance to people taking on loans. I support the policy, but I think it needs more work. You've also got to increase the pathways from level two to four, to six, through apprenticeships so they are seen as a more competitive and comparative offer to university.
When the new prime minister and education secretary come into office, what would you like to hear from them about skills reform?
I'd like to see a real focus on apprenticeships with reform of the apprenticeship levy. I'd like to see careers guidance, and work experience, being something that stops being so arbitrary, and almost optional. I know we have compulsory careers guidance, but so many schools are failing to achieve the Gatsby benchmarks that it suggests the government doesn’t take it seriously. I think provision's slightly better than what it was five or six years ago. But the changes to careers guidance in the first six years of this conservative government were really appalling.