Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160-179)
MR DAVID
LAMMY
9 OCTOBER 2007
Q160 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: It is 10,000
extra apprenticeships for adults, that is, across the whole sector;
and of course you have a tendency to recruit women into traditional
women's sectors and men ditto. Are you going to set targets for
the recruitment of women into STEM-related work, or STEM-related
apprenticeships? That is crucial. Out of that 10,000 we may have
just 50 places for women.
Mr Lammy: No, is the answer. We
cannot just have 50 places for women; that is a bottom line. We
cannot be in the situation that we have been in in the past. I
have seen the figures and they are not great when you look at
the amount of women in construction or engineering—that
is clear. There is a lot of work going on in the various sectors
to change that. I was on the Olympic site with the ODA. I had
a meeting with the construction industry the day before, and there
is a clearly a will and a desire to change things. There are funds;
there are pilots; there are projects; there is a desire to change
the stereotyping. Crucially there is also in the ODA procurement
contract an obligation to train, and they have issued their equality
plan which means that gender is an important dimension of that.
I do not think that we are in the situation that we have been
in in the past where, frankly, there has not often been the will,
there has not been the perception from employers, and there has
not been the activity to actually change that. That is a different
context. Alongside that in a broader more general way but crucially
important is the work of the 25 Sector Skills Councils. We have
said that we want to re-focus and re-license those Sector Skills
Councils going forward; that is a big part of the new Department's
mission, as it were, in relation to skills. Notwithstanding that,
I am pleased that the Sector Skills Councils themselves, who are
coming forward with their sector agreements, are prioritising
gender equality within those agreements. Not all the 25 have come
forward so far; we have got 13 of them that have come forward;
but a significant number of them are saying that gender is important.
One of the first questions I asked is: have we got women on the
boards of our Sector Skills Councils? Who are the chief executives
of our Sector Skills Councils? I am told a third of them are women.
I have not met them all obviously in the first 12 weeks in the
job. It is crucial that the sectors themselves, the employers
themselves, are seeing this as a priority and raising their game.
In construction they have a levy that they can use to good effect,
and that is why projects like the Olympics are so important. We
have got the biggest building programme in the country since the
war; it would be unacceptable if, in that context, we look back
in ten or 15 years' time with all these cranes across the country
and we had not got women the training; we had not got women into
employment; we had not made that difference. My answer to you
is: no, that will not be the case; but I do not think we are in
a case where we are prescriptive of employers and we are setting
them targets. That is not the way we have been managing our Sector
Skills Councils, and that is not the direction of travel.
Q161 Chairman: Before we move on,
you mentioned procurement contracts with the Olympics bid, something
we are very interested in. Do you support extending that kind
of procurement strategy to other public sector contracts in other
areas, because you cannot have a "fairly unique" experience
but it seems a bit of a "one-off" as we see it at the
moment Would that be something you support, extending that model
elsewhere?
Mr Lammy: Certainly in my Department
we have just done work on our Equality Impact Assessment and equality
is one of the issues that we should have regard to in procurement.
I am told by lawyers that there are technical rules about the
way in which you have got to allow people to bid for contracts
and other things; and you will understand that ministers usually
are not engaged in who gets particular contracts and things; that
is something you generally leave to permanent secretaries of departments.
We have indicated a desire in legislation. We have done that.
We have said to the public sector that they must have regard in
terms of race equality and a public duty there and that applies
in gender. I am hugely sympathetic to the reality that government
departments and the public sector broadly procures massive activity
of huge economic importance every year, and that there is huge
leverage that we can exercise to ensure that women are getting
access to skills, training and employment. We as a new Department
want to ensure that we are reminding colleagues about that across
the public sector. That is the strength of having a new Department;
in the sense that I am sitting here as a Minister in a Department
of Skills that can go beyond that in a way that perhaps could
not have been the case in the past.
Chairman: That is very helpful.
Q162 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: Chairman,
before we move on I would like to clarify that whilst that facility
is available in contract, when that contract is being assessed
it does not carry weight in that assessment. It is there as a
desirable; it is not there are a core element.
Mr Lammy: That is an important
point. Are you talking about, for example, the contract that the
ODA has just issued?
Mrs Curtis-Thomas: Yes. It is there as
a desirable but it is not there when you compare and contrast
the contracts for placing. It is not weighted at all.
Chairman: I think this is an area we
would want to pursue further, I am sure.
Q163 Roger Berry: Good morning, Minister.
The review in April of the implementation of the recommendations
of the Women and Work Commission said a fair bit about training.
Just following on from what you have said already, it referred
to a number of schemes—the London Olympics-related Level
3 pilots, the Skills Coaching pilots and the Women and Work Sector
Pathways and so on. I would be interested to know about how successful
you think these are proving? Assuming they are successful, is
funding available to roll them out more widely?
Mr Lammy: I think from what I
have seen it is true to say that some of these pilots have got
off to a slower start then certainly I would have liked. That
perhaps has been because they really are cutting to the heart
of changing employer practice. I do not want to evaluate the London
Level 3 pilot before that should be the case, and I certainly
do not think I ought to do that from this point sitting here.
Having met 30 or 40 of the women in Islington who are, broadly
speaking, in construction, building and painting and decorating,
I thought it was hugely impressive and, clearly, it has changed
their lives. Having spent some time with Karren Brady really proselytising
about what we have to do for women in relation to skills and training,
it is clear to me that there are huge things to do. As a London
MP I know that too often black and ethnic minority women are some
distance indeed from the labour market. It is not just about getting
them into employment, and the employment lasting a few years and
then goes; it is about embedding that. I would hope that this
work continues, and that we are able to accelerate it even further
once we have got that evaluation back. It cannot just be about
the individual pilots; it has to be about the working practices
of sectors themselves. Whether it is the construction industry,
working with graduates and undergraduates to make sure that their
qualifications are getting them jobs in the market, and their
construction skills are doing that; whether it is asset skills,
working with cleaners to get them up to higher levels so they
can run their own cleaning business; the individual Sector Skills
Councils have a job to do here as well.
Q164 Roger Berry: You have mentioned
some of the pilots and some of the schemes have got off to a slow
start. I wonder if you could say a bit about the characteristics
of those kinds of schemes and what have been the problems? Why
do they stand out as being slow starters, and what is being done
about it?
Mr Lammy: They got off to a slow
start but we are seeing pace and improvement. The London Level
3 pilot got 740 people who are participating. That needs to grow
over the next period so that we get to hopefully up to 7,000 learners
who have benefited. We need to see acceleration in that. We need
to see the money spent and used properly. What the LSC has been
keen to emphasise to me is that this work is about changing practice.
It is about persuading employers that this is good for them, and
that takes time—to find them and to place them. You want
the pilot to succeed, so you want to place women into an environment
that is going to work for them. You want employers to understand
the flexibility that is there and how the money is spent and other
things that have not been there in the past. At the same time
outside of the gender issue, as it were, Train to Gain is a new
programme full stop; it has only been running a year. Us putting
in our money, about £440 million now and going to over £900
million by 2010, is new. We are asking providers; we have got
new brokers; we are asking the system to adapt to a changed environment
anyway.
Q165 Roger Berry: Just so I am clear,
I think what you are saying and I would like you to confirm whether
this is correct or not, you keep emphasising "employers",
is the basic obstacle not the people coming forward to participate
in these schemes; it is not the resources that Government is providing,;
the real challenge is to generate that change of culture by employers?
Mr Lammy: Roger, you will forgive
me, if I had opened with opening remarks what I would have said
is that we have got a brand new Department, a Department dedicated
to skills, that is able to work across the system, across Whitehall.
We have made good progress in the last few years, but in terms
of where we need to get to, to implement Leitch's ambitions by
2020, we have got a long way to go and a new Department needs
to be there to drive that through. That means a culture change
in this country. Anyone sitting at home is now watching adverts
inbetween EastEnders and Coronation Street reminding
them that skills are in their hands, telling them to ring up a
number, that they can get skills. We are reminding employers through
Train to Gain that we are serious about Level 2; that full subsidy
is there for people who have not got Level 2 qualifications; and
part subsidy is there available for beyond that. That is a huge
culture change in this country. At the same time, who will be
the beneficiaries of that culture change particularly? They will
be people who have been traditionally left out of the labour market:
women, a key component of that; black and ethnic minorities, a
key component of that; but the list goes on. People with mental
illness, people with disabilities, are fundamentally important
in making that change. In a sense, when we talk about a "slow
start" it is because we are only 18 months into this journey
and a new Department enables us to accelerate this.
Q166 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: The number
of women who are taking apprenticeships are increasing but, unfortunately,
there is a disproportionate increase in the number of women going
into female segregated apprenticeships. In actual fact, it is
quite counterproductive in terms of set stereotyping and reinforcing
that. What progress has been made in developing a more flexible
apprenticeship structure? What success has there been in developing
a project-based structure? Why go for a project-based structure
anyway?
Mr Lammy: Why go for it? There
has been good progress in the project-based structure which is
now available across the piece for apprenticeships—that
flexibility is there. You can do your apprenticeship part-time;
you can pick it up; you can move from one employer to another.
The framework for apprenticeships we have changed to ensure that
maximum flexibility is there. You can change the framework; you
still have to incentivise, encourage, persuade and remind employers
that it is there and that it can benefit, for example, their female
employees. I think that is the journey we are now on. For some
it does mean changing practice and changing perception. I remember
when I was a lawyer in a City law firm, and City law firms were
talking about how we could have female partners, and in order
to do that it required flexibility; it required part-time working;
it required job-sharing. It has taken the City a long time to
come up with the mechanisms to allow that to happen even though
it is there in law. This is no different in a sense. We have taken
on board the project-based arguments; we have taken on board the
argument about making the system fully flexible. What we are doing
is ensuring that our brokers in Train to Gain when they are speaking
to employers are able to articulate these possibilities. I think
where we are seeing progress, although this is only a year in,
it is because brokers are reminding employers what is available;
because Business Link is linked in and is reminding employers
what is available, as well as the system driving change in design,
driving change in the way that allocates money and the way that
it pilots fully flexible projects.
Q167 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: One of the
reasons that people fail to complete their apprenticeship programmes,
and particularly women, is that they do not get work-based opportunities.
As much as I am cheered to hear your assertion that project-based
apprenticeships is working —
Mr Lammy: No, it is there across
the system. You can do it.
Q168 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: In terms
of accessing it and making that available to women it is still
a very long way off. What impact has this project-based approach
had on the completion rates for apprenticeships for women?
Mr Lammy: The story on completion
rates as you know three or four years ago and certainly when we
came to power was hugely problematic. Completion rates: 40% in
2004-05, rising to 53% in 2005-06. It looks like it is round about
60% this year with no gender differences on those latest figures,
so that is progress.
Q169 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: Is that gender
differences over all sectors?
Mr Lammy: I cannot answer that.
I can certainly come back to the Committee on that.
Q170 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: That is something
I think we need answered, simply because if you disaggregated
those figures you would find there is a disproportionate number
of failures for STEM-related careers, than there is in the set
stereotyped career path. I put it to you that what we are about
here is trying to get more women into work, diversifying the range
of opportunities available to women, and setting targets in relation
to the successful completion of apprenticeships for women. I also
applaud the sentiments with respect to the BME group and people
with disabilities. It is absolutely vital.
Mr Lammy: I am with you. That
is the overall figure. I would expect to see, and would be staggered
if I did not see, differentials between sectors as you indicate.
As I say, this is very much in the mix in the apprenticeship review
where we are looking at all of these issues. Your indication of
targets is one of the things that is on the table. Mrs Curtis-Thomas:
I think quite frankly, Minister, without targets you cannot
get the Sector Skills Councils to respond because they need to
have those to drive their employers.
Q171 Chairman: I visited my FE college
last week which had done a project analysing girls and young women
not going into non-traditional areas. A number of factors were
seen from the attitude of the tutors, their own tutors, to the
attitude of others in their group, and to others on work placements—many
of the factors that you might expect to be there. One of the things
that the college principal said was that they would like to do
some more diversity projects, particularly to get girls and young
women into some of the more traditional areas, like taster courses,
like women-only motor vehicle and bricklaying courses; but their
funding at the college is such that it is tied in so closely to
particular targets in funding for Level 2 courses et cetera that
they cannot find any small pots of money that would enable them
to do things which do not fit into those categories that would
help them break down some of those boundaries. They are very keen
to do it. I was told even just £20,000 for the college could
help them do that but there is no access to such funds. Would
you like to comment on that?
Mr Lammy: I do not think the Committee
would want us to back off our aspirations on Level 2. It is the
case that there were many people doing short courses, some of
whom did not get qualifications to speak for the time they had
spent on that course, and many of whom were going round and round
in circles with no progression. We are absolutely clear that the
aspiration to get 80% of our population up to GCSE level is a
noble aspiration and it is one we have got to stick to, and we
have got to encourage providers and FEIs to help us deliver it.
It is hugely important, I think, for social mobility and for aspiration.
In the end it benefits women directly. At the same time within
that we know, for example, that in relation to apprenticeships
you have to provide tasters; you have to provide work placements.
UKRC are looking at work placements for girls in the STEM subjects,
I know, and have got some money and are doing that work. E-skills
are working with 10-14 year old girls in schools with IT so that
they can change the perceptions of young women wanting to go into
the IT sector. Those taster courses are there. They should be
there. There is funding in the system. I am hearing from some
of the colleges that they want some flexibility. I have got to
look to see how that money in the system is being spent. Again,
part of our apprenticeship review will be to ensure that we are
embedding in a bigger way that work that has got to go on pre-16,
because parents have influence and have strong perceptions about
what careers they want for their young girls; and we have to have
employers in school working with parents to change those perceptions.
You are right, we have got to have the funds there in the system
to meet that need. I am happy to look at it but, at the same time,
it would be wrong to back off the Level 2 aspiration, which is
a fundamental to the skills agenda going forward.
Q172 Roger Berry: Minister, earlier
you touched on the question about the accessibility of training
courses. As we all know, traditionally many training courses have
been geared at young people who attend them full-time; and for
people, for example, who have caring responsibilities the timetabling
of this is wrong and the flexibility is not there. You were suggesting
that there had been significant improvement in this. My question
is: in Towards a Fairer Future we are told that the Government
asked Ofsted to "consider the practice of a sample of adult
education providers to establish the general picture of accessibility"
with a view to using best practice guidelines 2007-2008; which
sort of suggests to me that it has taken quite a long time to
address this accessibility issue. Are we being to slow in addressing
the needs of people with caring responsibilities or people who
wish to combine various activities with some training? Is the
flexibility really improving as we speak?
Mr Lammy: Let me give you an example.
I listened to some of the learndirect phone calls within the nextsteps
programme, those are women who are often not in the workforce,
who are very low skilled, who are ringing up; they are not just
getting advice about what course they can take; they are getting
advice about child care; they are getting advice about caring
allowance and those sorts of responsibilities; what is in a local
neighbourhood; how they can make that particular course a reality;
and how they can hopefully make long-term employment a particular
reality. That is happening. I am not going to suggest it is happening
for all women with caring responsibilities; that is why the Ofsted
work continues; and it is also why there is a cross-government
review of carers which the Prime Minister has initiated, in which
obviously my Department is playing a big part. I am obviously
pleased that this is now firmly on the political agenda. There
is a lot more to do in relation to this, I think; but I have seen
evidence of good work going on that is helping these women come
back into the labour market.
Q173 Roger Berry: Is there anything
you can say about the timescales in terms of particular targets
for improvement?
Mr Lammy: I am not sure I can.
A point where there is both the Ofsted work and the cross-government
review of the carers going on.
Q174 Roger Berry: The Ofsted guidance
will be published when?
Mr Lammy: May I come back to you
on that? Roger Berry: Yes.
Q175 Miss Kirkbride: Are you aware
of the social entrepreneurs' project "Women Like Us"
and, if so, do you like it, and are you going to promote it?
Mr Lammy: I am aware of "Women
Like Us" because they are working quite a lot in North London
and they are working in Haringey.
Q176 Miss Kirkbride: Do you think
this is a marketable way forward and how are you going to put
it if it is?
Mr Lammy: I think I have asked
to go and see one of the projects. I have not been to see one
of the projects. I do think that we have got to work with Social
Enterprise. Rightly, much of your questioning has been top-down.
What is the Government doing? How are you setting targets? Where
is the money going? How are you making this happen? I have wanted
to emphasise in some of my answers the key role of changing culture
and employers. I think the other side of the coin is social enterprise
such as Women Like Us. It is grassroots organisations on the ground
and how we can support them. Phil Hope was in my job before this,
he is now Third Sector Minister, so there is key partnership that
can be done there to really help the Third Sector help us deliver
this; and I think it is partnership that is not that different
from the key role that unions have played in relation to the skills
agenda. We have been able to give them extra funds, and we have
seen the benefits because a woman on the shop floor saying to
a colleague, "You can do this course" has borne results.
We want to see that with the Third Sector and Social Enterprise
as well. I will go and see Women Like Us and I will look across
the piece at the organisations that are dedicated to gender and
skills that are out there and are doing good work, so I am not
just going to FE colleges and others. I am told that I can write
to you on the timescales for the Ofsted practice and I will do
that. Roger Berry: Thank you. Chairman: We look
forward to receiving your letter and anything else you would care
to share with us.
Q177 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: Going back
to the issue of Sector Skills Councils, which we started talking
about earlier, we understand that eight Sector Skills Councils
are using the money available under the Women and Work Sector
Pathways Initiative to do things like identifying barriers to
women's progression in their sectors, providing appropriate training
and generally assisting women to progress in their careers. Firstly,
I know this is a bit unfair but I would be interested to know
which of those Sector Skills Councils we are talking about. It
sounds interesting, but that is £10 million worth of government
funding and matched funding by employers. Is that £10 million
from both parties or is it a total sum, with £5 million coming
from each or £10 million in total from each?
Mr Lammy: It is £10 million
of government money.
Q178 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: With matched
funding coming from industry. So how much industry funding have
you attached to match that?
Mr Lammy: May I come back to you
on that. I will talk to you about the projects if you want me
to talk to you about the projects. May I come back to you about
how the money has been divvied up?
Q179 Mrs Curtis-Thomas: The first
thing I want to know is: that there are eight Sector Skills Council
which have stepped up to the mark in relation to this particular
programme, and which ones they are?
Mr Lammy: I have the list in front
of me. We have got Asset Skills, which I have mentioned already,
and they are helping cleaners to level up their skills. We have
got the automotive and retail recruiting a hundred women into
customer services and giving them specific training so they can
actually get qualifications. There is an area where there are
many, many different qualifications, but qualifications that would
help them move forward.
| 
