Examination of Witnesses (Questions 320-339)
MR MARK
FISHER, MR
DAVID HUNTER
AND MR
TERRY WATTS
9 JANUARY 2006
Q320 Mrs Dorries: David, you said
that Lifelong Learning was involved in education across all the
sectors, I am a bit confused, do you not think there are many
organisations involved in education already? Where do you think
the LLUK can bring value into the FE sector?
Mr Hunter: Our organisation is
about strategic workforce planning. There are a lot of other organisations,
like the AoC and others, that represent colleges for other things,
but this is the vital thing, to bring a systematic approach to
workforce planning that we have not had before and the key tool
for that is our Sector Skills Agreement. I think the danger is
not all the organisations that are there, but the overlap between
organisations. One of the things which I appreciate about the
new Quality Improvement Agency and the Quality Improvement Strategy
that they are developing is the fact that all the supply side
organisations are going to be clearly linked through that so that
we all know what we are doing, when we are doing it and how we
are doing it. We are a core partner there along the Centre of
Excellence in Leadership and the Learning and Skills Council and
the inspectorates, et cetera. I think that is what makes the difference.
Just to emphasise, this is the first time we have tackled strategic
planning across this sector for workforce issues and that is so
vital. That is going to lead to a new qualification strategy,
new qualification standards from 2007 for FE, work-based learning,
adult community learning, same standards linked to a licence to
practise, so this is about the professionalisation of the sector
which has not happened in England before.
Q321 Mrs Dorries: Given that you
are so new to it, do you think you are the best placed organisation
to undertake it?
Mr Hunter: Some of us are not
that new to it, some of us have been involved in this in other
organisations. For instance, I have come from the Further Education
National Training Organisation and I was Chief Executive of the
Association of Colleges in Northern Ireland. We come with a lot
of experience, but there is also a lot of synergy between what
happens in HE, FE, work-based learning, adult community learning,
libraries and the youth service. There is a lot that we all bring
to that to break down those. When we did our initial survey as
to what employers wanted from us, they wanted us to break down
the barriers, break down the silos, have a clear standards and
qualifications strategy right across those sectors and to have
much more flexibility than we have had in the past and that is
what we are about and that is what our Sector Skills Agreement
will show.
Q322 Mrs Dorries: Foster suggested
that the DfES should publish a comprehensive workforce development
strategy, do you agree that this is a priority and that the DfES
should be taking the lead in this?
Mr Hunter: We have got a shared
responsibility with the DfES on that very issue and that strategy
will work well within our Sector Skills Agreement, which will
run for probably an 18-month period because it will cover all
the five sectors I have outlined. Yes, I think that is important
and I hope we will have a clear definition of what the Department's
role is and what our role is in some form of memorandum of agreement
early in the new year.
Q323 Mrs Dorries: Where should effort
be principally focused in the development of a further education
workforce?
Mr Hunter: The teaching and learning
context is very important, the support side as well and also leadership
and management. I have just outlined to you some of the quite
exciting things that are happening in the teaching and learning
context, the professionalisation approach. In the next two years
we are working and are on track to have 90% of the workforce qualified
in teaching and now we are going to bring in this new qualification
that will extend their skills beyond where they are now. That
is our first priority. Leadership and management are there as
well as appropriate support for support staff.
Q324 Mr Chaytor: My question is also
for David in the first instance. In the Foster Report, the two
recommendations about workforce development do not make any reference
to Lifelong Learning UK. The first is about the workforce development
plan and the second is about the management training programme.
Who is going to draw up the workforce development plan and who
is going to be responsible for the middle-management training
programme? Will it be officials of the Department or will it be
your own organisation?
Mr Hunter: We are in discussion
with the Department about that at the moment. We are very clear
that we have a lead on workforce issues in practically making
those changes in concert with them. Middle-management will be
the work of CEL, supported by ourselves because we have the standards
and we will probably quality mark the work that CEL does, Centre
of Excellence in Leadership, but we will work in partnership with
them and we have a memorandum of understanding on that.
Q325 Mr Chaytor: Remind me what CEL
is?
Mr Hunter: Centre of Excellence
in Leadership. It is the organisation that does the leadership
training for the Learning and Skills Sector.
Q326 Mr Chaytor: Do they cover the
leadership training for the whole of the sector?
Mr Hunter: The Learning and Skills
Sector, yes.
Q327 Mr Chaytor: In terms of the
information about current staff, levels of qualifications and
skills shortages et cetera, who has the responsibility for that?
Mr Hunter: Labour market intelligence
is our responsibility, we have just taken that over from the Department
at the end of last year.
Q328 Mr Chaytor: The Department had
it previously, but they did not do anything about it, so it is
not much of a responsibility, is it?
Mr Hunter: I think I would beg
to differ, there is a great responsibility.
Q329 Mr Chaytor: Let me rephrase
the question. Did the Department carry out their responsibility
because my recollection is whenever I ask parliamentary questions
about the experience, training and qualifications of staff in
FE colleges, the Department always said this was not their responsibility,
it was a matter for individual colleges? Is there a body of information
in the Department about the workforce within FE colleges?
Mr Hunter: We have just published
a report at the end of last year on FE workforce, I would be happy
to send you a copy.
Q330 Mr Chaytor: Was that based on
the information the Department had collected?
Mr Hunter: That was information
which was collected by the LSC in the staff individual record
which had not been analysed before. I think this is the first
time it has been analysed and colleges can benchmark themselves
against what is happening in the regions, et cetera.
Q331 Mr Chaytor: Are the LSCs going
to continue to collect that through the SIR?
Mr Hunter: No, after next year
I do not think they are and we are very concerned about that.
We are going to have to find, as the new organisation charged
with this responsibility, another way of doing this. We are in
discussion with the Department about that at the moment.
Q332 Mr Chaytor: This is an interesting
example of the confusion in the area, is it not? The Department
says it has a responsibility for the work for development which
is passing across to you. They claim they have been collecting
information but, in fact, it has really been the LSC and the LSC
is now refusing to collect information in the future. Is that
a fair and accurate description of the situation we have?
Mr Hunter: Yes, it is quite a
useful overview.
Q333 Mr Chaytor: Can we get an absolute
commitment from yourself, David, that your organisation will cut
through all this overlap and application of responsibility and
take on supreme responsibility for the co-ordination of this?
Mr Hunter: That is what we are
determined to do because you cannot make appropriate decisions
and workforce planning without clear, consistent and coherent
labour market data. That is patchy right across our five sectors.
I regret that the LSC are not going to collect this information
and that is because of their anti-bureaucracy approach, but the
problem was—and it is almost an own goal—that information
was not used in the past to inform strategy. We are on the game
now to do something with it.
Mr Watts: In each of the sectors,
one of their primary objectives is to make sure that they are
the source of information on skills within their sectors. One
of our key jobs is to make sure we have that information, not
just for Lifelong Learning but for all of the sectors.
Q334 Mr Chaytor: Mr Watts, in terms
of your sector, will your organisation be responsible for labour
market intelligence?
Mr Watts: Absolutely, we are the
only ones who have got a view of it across the whole of the UK
and that is one of the key things that we offer, the infrastructure.
Q335 Mr Chaytor: What was done by
your predecessor sectors?
Mr Watts: The predecessor to Proskills
were a number of National Training Organisations who did the best
they could based on the information, resources and money they
could find to do something. They were not necessarily funded,
they were only funded on a project basis primarily. Many of them
did other things as well as be the strategic body on skills, they
were training organisations, trade bodies or something like that.
Q336 Mr Chaytor: If we go back in
time, it is 30 years since the Manpower Services Commission was
established. They were superseded by the TECs and the LSCs. All
of these organisations have a responsibility for market intelligence
and now we are starting almost from scratch again, are we not?
Mr Watts: It is not from scratch.
To become a licensed Sector Skills Council we did a lot of work
to find out what information is out there already, so there is
information out there. The first stage of the Sector Skills Agreement—which
all of the SSCs are doing as they get to the right stage, and
we are starting ours now—is to make sure you have got the
best information and top it up with primary research where it
is necessary and make sure you get a sustainable route for that
information. As David said we have got to do that to give advice
on where the direction is. The difference is we get this £1.3
million, which is not a huge amount of money to fund all the things
we are asked to do, but it does give us the security of tenure,
that we can plan for doing that on an ongoing basis. If we do
not give that credibility, we cannot influence, and that is one
of the key things we have to do.
Q337 Mr Chaytor: Mr Watts, what do
you see as the main difference between the new Sector Skills Council
and the old industrial training board?
Mr Watts: I have had experience
of NTOs. I used to work in e-skills NTO before it was the Sector
Skills Council. The main difference is that we have the opportunity
to influence the strategy and the various people involved in the
supply side. We have got the voice of employers and employers
are supporting us far more than I believe they supported the NTOs.
In theory and on paper we have the voice and the opportunity to
sit at the meetings and influence the strategy, the White Papers
that are mentioned in the report. The NTOs never had that length
of tenure, if you like, we were never there for long enough and
never established long enough to be able to do that. Sector Skills
Councils are invited to comment now, hence we are here. I think
that is the main significance, that employers can have a voice
in the supply side now.
Q338 Chairman: Mark, are you keeping
your head down there? Are you unhappy that this data is not going
to be collected any more by the LSC? Is it going to hamper the
work of the Sector Skills Councils?
Mr Fisher: I think both David
and Terry have quite rightly said that LMI is an absolutely essential
part of what the Sector Skills Council is, it is the lifeblood
of Sector Skills Councils and if they have not got that data they
cannot function, they cannot articulate for the supply side what
it is they need. I am disappointed with the situation David has
described but I am very pleased that he has picked up the mantle
and he is going to seek that LMI out. I expect every one of the
25 Sector Skills Councils to do the same in their sectors.
Q339 Chairman: Would you like us
to call the LSC in and ask them about this? Why are they giving
it up, apart from what we all applaud, cutting bureaucracy? If
this is a vital tool we should have the information, should we
not?
Mr Fisher: I think if David has
found a way through this then we may not need to call them in
but if there is an issue I would like to come back.
| 
