11 Rethinking education: investing
in skills
| (34435)
14871/12
+ ADDs 1-8
COM(12) 669
| Commission Communication: Rethinking Education: Investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes
|
| Legal base | —
|
| Department | Business, Innovation and Skills
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 28 March 2013
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 86-xxix (2012-13), chapter 3 (23 January 2013)
|
| Discussion in Council | 15 February 2013
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared; further information requested
|
Background and previous scrutiny
11.1 The purpose of the Communication is to galvanise a wide
range of actors to pursue reform of education and vocational training
systems in order to provide the skills needed to increase productivity
and boost growth and competitiveness. It covers all levels of
education and training, from early years to higher education,
and vocational and work-based training. It is accompanied by eight
Commission staff working documents (ADDs 1-8) providing detailed
information and analysis to underpin the policy recommendations
contained in the Communication. These fall into two categories:
strategic priorities which Member States need to address as part
of their domestic reform processes; and action to be taken at
EU level to support and coordinate Member States' reform efforts.
11.2 The Government assured us that the areas
of activity identified in the Communication were broadly in line
with UK domestic policy but highlighted a number of concerns regarding
the actions proposed at EU level which are described in our Twenty-ninth
Report of 23 January 2013. In particular, the Government questioned
whether country-specific recommendations issued as part of the
European Semester reporting cycle to monitor Member States' economic
and employment policies were an appropriate tool for monitoring
Member States' education and vocational training policies. The
Government also indicated that it would seek further information
on the Commission's proposal to analyse the efficiency of public
investment in education and training.
11.3 We noted that the Government expected the
Education Council to agree Conclusions based on the Communication
in February and asked the Minister for Skills (Matthew Hancock)
to report back to us on the outcome, explaining how the Government's
concerns had been addressed. We also noted that one of the Commission's
staff working documents, on language competences (ADD 2), proposed
establishing a new EU benchmark on language learning which seeks
to ensure that, by 2020, at least 50% of 15 year-olds are able
to hold a basic conversation in their first foreign language (the
EU average is 42%, but only 9% in the UK), and that at least 75%
of pupils in lower secondary school study a minimum of two foreign
languages (the EU average is 61%). We asked the Minister whether
he welcomed the benchmark and how likely the UK was to achieve
it by 2020.
The Minister's letter of 28 March 2013
11.4 The Minister confirms that the Education
Council agreed Conclusions at its meeting on 15 February and says
that the UK secured a number of important changes, insisting on
the inclusion of an explicit reference to the principle of subsidiarity,
"noting" rather than "welcoming" various actions
to be undertaken by the Commission, and ensuring that any follow-up
action to country specific recommendations addressing education
and training policies should be a purely voluntary process.[36]
He adds:
"In my opinion, in delivering Country-Specific
Recommendations (CSRs) on national education policy, the EU is
operating at the limits of its competence to 'support and co-ordinate
education policies' as set out in Treaty Articles 165 and 166.
It is true, however, that Article 148 of the Treaty (which governs
the Europe 2020 process of guidelines, targets etc) makes provision
for CSRs on education and training where there is a clear labour
market rationale. Against this background, and mindful of the
fact that CSRs are non-binding on Member States, our approach
is always to try to limit an over-prescriptive approach to education
and training and to take every opportunity to remind the Commission
that policy in this area is very much a national issue."
11.5 Turning to discussions within the Council
on the draft Conclusions, he continues:
"[a]cting on instructions, our Deputy Permanent
Representative stressed our view that, in the context of the Article
148 procedure, CSRs related to education should be agreed only
where they relate to an identifiable labour market issue that
impacts on employment growth. She also made the more general point
that CSRs in this area should be discussed and agreed with Member
States in advance, in recognition of the particular nature of
education co-operation in the EU and the primacy of the role of
Member States. It is important to recall that the UK is not subject
to sanctions or binding mechanisms as part of the CSR process
or at any other stage of the European Semester, and that the Commission's
Communications on forthcoming economic governance arrangements
are aimed primarily at the euro area. We also aim, of course,
to minimise the bureaucratic costs associated with the management
of the CSR process."
11.6 The Minister says that the Conclusions note
the Commission's intention to analyse the efficiency of public
spending on education and training and to initiate a debate on
the benefits of investment in different education and training
sectors. He adds:
"Our Representative intervened again on this
point, making clear that this sort of spending analysis should
be very much a matter for Member States. Notwithstanding that,
we have asked the Commission to provide more information on its
plans."
11.7 The Minister explains that the proposed
new European benchmark on language competences stems from the
Conclusions of the Barcelona European Council in 2002 which urged
Member States to improve language learning. Discussions on the
benchmark are at an early stage and the Conclusions endorsed by
the Education Council simply note the Commission's intention to
carry out further methodological work on data collection. He continues:
"Although I would not welcome a new EU-wide
benchmark in this area, I recognise that the idea may command
the support of a majority of Member States, given the priority
attached to languages learning within EU education cooperation.
I believe that the crucial issue here is that we would not be
required to report on such a benchmark, and that it would be a
benchmark — i.e., some sort of average reference
point against which countries could compare themselves —
and not a target.
"In terms of our own policymaking, there could
even be some advantages to publicising comparative information
of this sort, even though it is clearly very unlikely that the
UK would be able to reach the suggested level. We have participated,
for example, in the European Survey of Language Competences, which
shines a useful spotlight on our poor performance relative to
several other EU countries. That said, I am well aware that there
is a track record in the EU education domain of attempts by the
Commission to turn benchmarks into more prescriptive targets (two
of the existing Europe 2020 targets started off this way). I can
assure the Committee that we will oppose any such development."
11.8 Finally, the Minister notes that the Communication
on Rethinking Education contains various other proposals
for EU activity in the education field, including new initiatives
on apprenticeships, open learning and entrepreneurship. He adds:
"I am far from convinced that these ideas represent
real added value, particularly at a time when we are trying to
bear down on administrative costs in the EU. For this reason,
we also secured some new wording in the Council Conclusions requiring
a detailed cost/benefit analysis to be included in the Commission's
plans. I hope to enlist the support of other Member States in
ensuring that this is followed up, enabling Education Ministers
to exercise better control over what is, I fear, an expansionist
Commission agenda."
Conclusion
11.9 We note the Minister's concerns regarding
the potential for "competence creep" as the EU expands
its activities within the field of education, as well as his reservations
about the use of country-specific reservations to address Member
States' education and training policies, and draw his reply to
the attention of the Education Committee. We would welcome a further
update from the Minister on the development of the benchmark on
language competences and on how the Commission proposes to conduct
its analysis of the efficiency of public investment in education
and training once more information becomes available. Meanwhile,
we are content to clear the Communication from scrutiny.
36 See Council Conclusions on investing in education
and training - a response to Rethinking Education at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/135467.pdf. Back
| 
