Q
50Jeff
Ennis: My second, more specific, question is directed
initially to Mr. Wilson. One innovation in the workplace in
the last 10 years or so has been the introduction of trade union
learning representatives. They have played an enormous role in getting
people to undertake national vocational qualifications for the first
time. How do you see the Bill enhancing the role of trade union
learning representatives under the new
structure? Tom
Wilson: Primarily, it will give ULRs a clear role in
accompanying people who make their request or even accompanying groups
of people. Many employers might find it more sensible and convenient to
handle training for a group of people. A ULR could help the group come
together to formulate a request like that. That is the first way.
Secondly, there is the added emphasis that it will put on training more
generally. That will help ULRs to boost their role and profile in the
workplace, and help to encourage employees to be aware of the help that
ULRs can give
them. To
take apprenticeships as an example, as a union movement we are trying
very hard to persuade employers to do more to back apprenticeships, and
with a great deal of success. We are pushing at an open door. That in
turn will also help ULRs and Union Learn to provide the wherewithal to
employers to help to explain the world of apprenticeships. It is very
much a partnership
approach. I
would also like to return to your previous question, which is relevant.
I am aware of the existing concern of a possible displacement of adult
learners by the emphasis on apprenticeships, but, to be honest, that
concern is not shared by the TUC. Certainly, we strongly welcome and
support the enormous emphasis on, and importance attached to,
apprenticeships. It is perhaps rather unfortunate that, at the same
time, there has also been a decline in some courses for adult learners,
but I do not think that the emphasis on apprenticeships has anything to
do with that. It is not as if there is a zero-sum game and one exists
at the expense of the other—far from
it. We
very much support equal emphasis being placed on adult learners, which
I think the Government are doing. We would like to see more attention
being paid to English for speakers of other languages, and those things
will be caught up and brought forward by the
Bill.
Q
51Jeff
Ennis: I wonder whether the CBI and BCC representatives
have something to say about the role that ULRs can play in the
workplace in promoting suitable training opportunities for the
businesses that they
represent. Richard
Wainer: Most employers with ULRs on site are
generally positive about the effect they have had. On the basic skills
agenda in particular, ULRs have often done a great job in making
employers aware that they may have literacy and numeracy problems in
their work force. There is clearly a big stigma attached to illiteracy
and innumeracy, and I think that ULRs have done a pretty good job on
that particular
issue. John
Lucas: We would certainly agree with what
Mr. Wainer has
said.
Q
52Stephen
Williams: Following on from the question on ULRs, when I
was on the same Select Committee as Jeff, I was impressed by the
evidence given by ULRs with large employers. But small businesses, of
course,
do not often have unions, nor are they obliged to recognise them.
Mr. Wilson, might not the duty, or the ability, for an
employee to be accompanied by a union representative be too onerous for
small businesses? Perhaps they should be exempted from that
obligation. Tom
Wilson: On the contrary, it is our experience that
employers generally find it helpful to have a ULR, perhaps to
articulate a case a bit more
effectively.
Q
53Stephen
Williams: In small
businesses? Tom
Wilson: Even in small businesses. When a small
business, due to time pressures, has only an hour or so to hear an
employee’s request, that hour will be much more effectively used
if the employee is accompanied. I can see that this might seem rather
bureaucratic on the face of it, but I think that small businesses that
experience it will see that, on the contrary, it makes a lot more
sense.
Stephen
Williams: For the record, the Federation of Small
Businesses is not here to give evidence itself, but that answer is
directly contrary to what the FSB provided in its
evidence.
Q
54Mrs.
Hodgson: Richard, on behalf of the CBI, will you tell us
the LSC’s strength and
weaknesses? Richard
Wainer: That is a difficult question. Perhaps we can
frame it in terms of the way the Government are moving towards the new
situation and identify where change is needed. On the adult side, the
move towards a more demand-led system, which will offer more
flexibility for providers to deliver to the needs of their local
regional employers, will certainly be of benefit from the current
situation, although it will take time for us to achieve that. As I said
to Mr. Hayes, it is important that focus is maintained on
ensuring that Train to Gain apprenticeships and similar programmes
continue to meet business
needs.
Q
55Mrs.
Hodgson: Do you support the idea of a wholly integrated
education and training system for all children and young people aged
from naught to 19? Also, do you support the idea of a post-19 training
system that is demand-led and that creates a one-stop shop of support
for
employers? Richard
Wainer: Clearly, you have to ensure that those are
not seen as two distinct systems and that young people do not fall off
a cliff when they get to 19 because the next system has not picked them
up. But, as long as the Government maintain focus on ensuring that that
does not happen, yes,
absolutely.
The
Chairman: We have a queue of people—John Hayes, the
Minister, David Laws, then Alison
Seabeck.
Q
56Mr.
Hayes: Briefly, Mr. Wilson, you said that you
did not think that the decline in adult learning was related to the
focus on apprenticeships, but is it related to the focus that the
Government have placed on accredited level
2? Tom
Wilson: Part of it may be. It is very complex and
many of our members would be the first to say that they like
accreditation and value the opportunity to gain qualifications. There
are mixed views and I am not sure that we can provide simple
answers.
Q
57Mr.
Hayes: How far is non-accredited adult and community
learning a route back to employment?
Tom
Wilson: It certainly can be and we would be the first
to say that. A fairly extreme example is someone who I know recently
attended a salsa dancing class and said that that had got her back into
education and learning—bizarre as it might sound—and
helped her back into learning at work. I am not saying that that is a
reason for the taxpayer to fund all salsa classes. It is more
complicated than that.
Q
58Mr.
Hayes: Should sector skills councils have a bigger
structural role than they are given in the Bill?
Keith
Marshall: Yes. I can amplify that. We have links with
employers right across the piece, whether or not they are members of
membership bodies. We are required to consult and engage with them all
and develop frameworks, which satisfy the employers’ needs in
England and UK wide. To my mind, the sector skills councils are key to
apprenticeships in general and the way that the Bill is intending to
move in
particular.
Q
59Jim
Knight: I have several questions; one is supplementary to
that last question. As opposed to the liberal mention in the
explanatory notes about the importance of sector skills councils in the
delivery of apprenticeships and how we effect the legislation, how do
you want us to legislate on sector skills
councils? Keith
Marshall: The areas in which I think the sector
skills councils are particularly important are development, publication
and implementation of
frameworks.
Q
60Jim
Knight: And should we mention that in primary
legislation?
Keith
Marshall: You specifically mentioned other
organisations and agencies in other parts of the overall system, but
not there.
Q
61Jim
Knight: And you would like us
to? Keith
Marshall: I would,
yes.
Q
62Jim
Knight: My first general question expands that
asked by Sharon to try to bottom this out in terms of the LSC reforms.
Do the witnesses support the general principle of an adult learning
agency in the form of a post-19, demand-led skills funding agency and a
naught to 19 structure? Having moved from a divide at 16, wherever the
divide is you need to ensure that the arrangements bridging it are
smooth. Richard
Wainer: I will start with a supplementary to my
previous answer, which goes back to previous comments that it is fine
to have a separate naught to 19 agency, but clearly when young people
are looking to move into the workplace, whether that is through an
apprenticeship or otherwise, it is important that local authorities or
the national agency take into account what local employers and
businesses are looking for.
John
Lucas: The tenor of our problems with this has been
the primary position given to local authorities. We are also worried
about the possible split and impact on colleges that are sixth forms as
well as further education centres. We want to ensure that colleges are
not split and that their valuable work is not damaged.
Tom
Wilson: To go back to the original question about the
pros and cons of the LSC, one of its great advantages over the Further
Education Funding Council
is that it is wider and embraces a wider conception of adult learning
than just FE. While it provided a lot of clarity and consistency in
funding allocations and so on, it was a very large agency. To their
credit, the Government have tackled
that. The
division between the funding of youth and adult skills makes sense to
us, and I am not sure that it makes the situation much more complicated
to split the body in two. We welcome the inclusion of the National
Apprenticeship Service in the SFA because it gives a clear focus. We
welcome the statutory requirement on the chief executive to be
responsible for certain elements of the apprenticeship service. We
warmly welcome those elements of the
Bill. The
devolution to local authorities in the YPLA proposals is sensible. One
criticism of the LSC was that it was not sufficiently responsive to
localities and regions. Many local authorities complained that it was
too bureaucratic because it did not pay them enough attention. These
proposals give them a bigger slice of the action, with more latitude
and freedom to develop programmes and funding patterns that suit their
circumstances. The
transitional period will be messy, but once things have settled down
the situation should be a lot better. It will not be perfect, but it
will be
better. Keith
Marshall: The element that concerns us most is the
transition.
Jim
Knight: I want to talk about that in a second. This
question is about the principle. I will ask you about transition
afterwards. Keith
Marshall: As far as we are concerned, the benefit of
the LSC is that we have a single organisation with which to engage. We
recognise the regional and local structure, but I am talking about the
sectoral and spatial balance. We can talk to the LSC nationally about
sectoral issues, which will then apply across the piece. Our concern is
that once the LSC is dissolved, we will end up having not one sectoral
conversation, but dozens of them with different local
authorities.
Q
63Jim
Knight: On the transition, I am interested in whether you
have any evidence to contradict my impression that, despite all the
upheaval, LSC staff are doing a good job of sticking to task. They
continue to deliver good outputs in their jobs. The period of
transition and upheaval will continue as the Bill goes through
Parliament this year and through its implementation next year. There
will obviously be a relationship between that and the economic problems
we are going through. People have different predictions about how long
those problems will continue, but the implementation phase will go on
at the same time. Have you any evidence of a disruption to the service
because of the
changes? Richard
Wainer: I do not think that there is any evidence of
that at the moment, but that does not mean that our concerns are any
less valid. It is important that the Government prioritise ensuring
that they do not neglect front-line delivery when the minds of staff
might be on other things. I cannot point to any evidence at the moment,
but these are big changes. Our membership includes a lot of further
education colleges and private training providers that are nervous
about how local authorities will group
together.
John
Lucas: There is certainly nervousness within the LSC.
I am afraid that I do not have any evidence, but it would be
interesting to see the retention figures for LSC staff in various
posts. Those would show whether the uncertainty and change have caused
a loss of staff in key areas. It would be interesting to find that out.
However, I have not put in any freedom of information requests to do
that
yet. Tom
Wilson: I would like to put on the record the
TUC’s warm support. I appreciate the Minister’s words of
praise for LSC staff, who not just through this transition, but through
previous transitions, have performed remarkably well and done a
terrific
job. The
TUC has held two meetings between the representatives of the Public and
Commercial Services Union and Unison, which are the main unions
involved in local authorities and the LSC. Officials from various
Departments have come along. Those meetings have proved helpful in
fostering good exchanges and relationships. I know that the PCS in
particular, which represents the majority of LSC staff, has worked
pretty well through this process with managers. I am not saying that it
has been perfect; these things are always difficult. Having said that,
the process is proceeding pretty much as well as could have been
reasonably expected.
Keith
Marshall: Some LSC colleagues might smile when they
hear me say that there has been no impact of that sort at all. In fact,
the key issues for us continue to progress as they should. We are
already talking in detail to the National Apprenticeship Service about
how we will work with it as the rest of the system gets rearranged
around it. The NAS is already there and clearly it is going to be a key
agency for us. We are already talking to it at a variety of levels to
do what we can to ease that
transition.
| 
