| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The noble Baroness said: The new clause raises the issue of careers education, which we on these Benches have already said is very important in helping young people to secure a prosperous future. The guidance that young people receive about their careers is often crucial in helping them to make important choices for their future.
At the moment, I fear that careers education in England is a rather hit-and-miss affair. The service is gradually being subsumed into Connexions as part of a universal approach to helping young people. While I am all in favour of joined-up thinking, it is an unfortunate truth that Connexions will inevitably end up concentrating its resources on a narrow band of what might be called “problem young people”. Because it is trying to do so many things at once, a clear emphasis on careers guidance is missing in many places. Many young people end up getting rather threadbare and inadequate advice. All the right intentions are there, but not necessarily the breadth of knowledge and training to advise on careers matters.
I had an interesting meeting with Kieran Gordon, the immediate past president of the Institute of Career Guidance, who suggested one model of careers education that he believes to be very successful. It involves fully trained, independent careers advisers spending time both in schools and with employers. That way, they get to know the young people they were advising and they get to know what employers were looking for, which makes it easier to match them up. The advisers are impartial and get to know pupils and employers over several years.
I suggest that careers education should be a continual process, not just a series of one-off meetings where young people are presented with a range of ideas to choose from. Many have no idea what they want to do, or even what is available for them to do. We should be looking at a system that has prepared young people to know their own minds so that they can make decisions for themselves, with appropriate guidance. Young people should be trained to think flexibly so that they can better adapt to changing options.
Once we have set young people on a course to training and employment with the Bill, we should ensure that we can still provide guidance while they
3 July 2008 : Column 436
I have made some suggestions today but I do not claim to have all the answers. That is why I have proposed the new clause, so that we might explore the best way forward. We have the advantage of the careers education models already in place in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. We have nothing to lose and potentially much to gain by learning from them. I beg to move.
Baroness Sharp of Guildford: I support the amendment, although I think it is wrongly placed. It seems odd to place it after Clause 18 at the beginning of the section relating to employers when, in Part 2, Clauses 54 to 70—particularly Clause 66—are expressly concerned with issues of the Careers Service. It would have been better to have placed the new clause somewhere within Part 2 rather than at this point.
I declare an interest as a member of the Skills Commission, which has recently published a pamphlet about careers education. It advocates, among other things, an all-age careers service and to some extent criticises the Government for having failed to listen to those who advocated such a service at an earlier point.
4.45 pm
I share the reservations of the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, about the present capabilities of the Connexions and Careers Service. The Connexions service was set up under the Learning and Skills Act 2000, which was the very first education Bill on which I led for my party in this Chamber. I remember our discussions then about the proposed changes to the Careers Service. The idea was to set up the new Connexions service specifically to concentrate on the more vulnerable young people who were not in education, training or employment and needed to be brought within the net. We pointed out the difficulty that that would involve. It would require a very labour-intensive service. If the attention of advisers in the Careers Service was being switched to the more vulnerable young people, it would leave pupils in schools with very little in the way of careers guidance, information and advice. Precisely that has happened: many schools have little access these days to information, advice and guidance about careers. However, given what is happening—particularly the introduction of the multiple pathways at age 13 to 14, in terms not just of what choices to make at GCSE and A-level but, increasingly, of choice between the GCSE and A-level pathway, the diploma pathway and the apprenticeship pathway—a group of people who are trained to work with young people but who understand the employment world and an increasingly complex educational world that gives young people a choice of pathways is all the more necessary.
For all that the Connexions service has done a surprisingly good job with some young people, its success varies greatly from area to area. We have to be aware that the old Careers Service has largely disintegrated and that, in order to meet the requirements of the Bill, we will have to rebuild it and retrain many people with capabilities which are currently being lost.
3 July 2008 : Column 437
In any case, times have changed. What kind of information, advice and guidance service is now required? Young people get their information from the internet. There have developed a number of extremely successful careers information services, such as that run by Ufi’s learndirect, which is followed up with telephone guidance if it is required. Those services have proved to be extremely successful. Therefore, in terms of straight provision of information, an internet-based service available to all comers is necessary. I think that the Government recognise how important such an internet service would be. However, an internet-based service alone is not enough. Young people in particular need advice and guidance from a trained professional.
I turn to the case for an all-age service. The noble Baroness, Lady Verma, mentioned Wales and Northern Ireland, where such all-age services have been established extremely successfully. Because of the degree to which there is permeability between the 16 to 18 and further education, on into the adult skills sector, it would be far more satisfactory if there were an all-age service, and within that some that concentrate on providing for schools. Within schools there should be specialist careers teachers, but they need the support of the specialists outside. These are issues that we shall be coming to later, because I have tabled some amendments on them.
The Government need to have another look at careers services. They are putting a tremendous amount of emphasis on this area. There is need for it to be substantially reinforced, for a lot of retraining to be done and more people to be brought into it, but we have five years before the Bill is implemented—or before the raised learning participation age comes into effect, in 2013. There is five years, too, before the full range of diplomas comes on stream. Therefore, there is time to do as the amendment suggests and have a review of careers services and for the Government to effect some of the reforms that it is necessary to make.
Baroness Howe of Idlicote: I support the amendment proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Verma. I also have an amendment on careers advice later in the Bill. What the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, has said is absolutely right; quite apart from what we are debating today, there are now so many different pathways that the need for much more intensive all-embracing careers advice is very definitely there.
On the idea of having an independent review, as the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, said, we have five years before these provisions are likely to come into effect. If we had an overview and a hard look at the all-age advice that is already established in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, that would be an additional aid to getting it right for the situations and the additional compulsion that will exist for young people up to the age of 18. This is an excellent idea. The amendment may be in the wrong place, but it is no bad thing if we can have an early look at it.
Lord Elton: I should like to ask my noble friend whether I am right in this supposition. It is not only the learning path that is complex, which children are
3 July 2008 : Column 438
Lord Adonis: The amendment proposed by the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, would require the Secretary of State to commission an independent review into the effectiveness of the provision of careers advice in England and the appropriateness of a single all-age advice and guidance service as established in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
I shall take the two issues in turn—the review, and the appropriateness of a single service. Reviews on this subject have already been undertaken; for example, there was the Report of the End to End Review of Careers Education and Guidance, which reported to my department in July 2005, and the review of skills from the noble Lord, Lord Leitch, published in December 2006, which addressed careers services for adults. We are now implementing the findings of these reviews to build on good practice and to ensure that those areas in which information, advice and guidance have been found to be weak are brought up to the standard of the best.
Secondly, we have listened carefully to those who have called for an all-age careers service. Officials from my department and from the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills have held a series of exploratory discussions with key stakeholders on this issue over the past year. However, while we are fully convinced of the case for an all-age careers strategy,we are not convinced that the introduction of an all-age careers service is the best way forward. Adults and young people have different needs and issues to address and we believe that these require different solutions.
On the adult side, the Government accepted the recommendation of my noble friend Lord Leitch to establish a new, universal adult careers service, bringing together the existing adult face-to-face, telephone and online delivery and working in partnership with Jobcentre Plus in England, to be operational from 2010-11. Key features of the new adult service will be supporting the delivery of skills accounts, improving effectiveness by better needs identification through skills health checks, providing better integrated financial support for learning for those with the lowest skills and qualifications, greater use of online and telephone support, where appropriate, and meeting individual needs within a differentiated service reflecting government priorities to help the unemployed and the low skilled.
The Government will continue to work with partners to develop a joined-up advice service, covering issues such as housing, employment rights, childcare and financial and personal advice and support, as well as jobs and skills. The consultation paper that we have issued, Raising Expectations: Enabling the System to Deliver, sets out that the new skills funding agency will be responsible for managing, setting targets and service specifications for the adult advancement and careers service, which will be fully operational in 2010-11.
3 July 2008 : Column 439
We expect the full new service to provide skills health checks and action plans for up to half a million workless people and a further half a million skills health checks and action plans for adults in work, targeting those with low skills or those who need to retrain to progress. We are providing additional resources, rising to at least £50 million per year by 2010-11, to help to develop the new integrated employment and skills system, in particular the development of the new service and skills accounts.
We will continue to fund Connexions at around £470 million over the next two years, which is double the pre-Connexions service budget for the careers service. The Report of the End to End Review of Careers Education and Guidance, published in 2005, gave a broadly favourable verdict on Connexions. It said:
“A summary of available evidence on the progress of Connexions in March 2004 found that the service was making an impact, especially for young people who require intensive support. It has measurably reduced the number of young people in the NEET group. Young people report that the service makes a real difference to their progress through information, guidance and ongoing support. The University of Southampton’s research found Connexions was the most important intervening agency for the majority of pupils”.
That broadly favourable view of Connexions is sustained by stakeholders and surveys, which have been broadly positive, and by Ofsted, which in 28 inspections of Connexions partnerships has rated 89 per cent as satisfactory or better, with 60 per cent rated as good or better. That is why we have made provision for local authorities to be under a duty to comply with key elements of existing Connexions practice, including use of the brand itself and minimum qualifications for personal advisers.
The noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, specifically mentioned web-based services. It is worth noting in this context that Connexions Direct is an award-winning national helpline and website that currently provides services to young people. It complements the face-to-face delivery of local providers of information, advice and guidance to young people and the local area prospectus. Connexions Direct offers accurate, up-to-date information on a range of teen issues. The latest figures show that more than 160,000 young people visit the site on a weekly basis. It has received overwhelmingly positive feedback from young people. Clause 159 ensures that Connexions Direct will continue to be available to young people.
However, we are certainly not complacent and we are alive to the issue of improvements to advice and guidance, particularly to meet the needs of students when making decisions about diplomas, as the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, mentioned. Before the delivery of diplomas for 14 to 19 year-olds can go ahead, the consortia will have to pass through a rigorous gateway process to demonstrate that they will deliver high-quality information, advice and guidance. We recognise that the reforms under way for 14 to 19 year-olds will present a challenge to information, advice and guidance providers. We will need to focus on continuous improvements and bringing the performance of all providers up to the highest standards.
I acknowledge the points made by the noble Baronesses, Lady Verma and Lady Sharp, about the quality of schools’ careers services that are not specifically geared
3 July 2008 : Column 440
5 pm
Baroness Verma: I thank the Minister for his response. I agree totally with the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, about the great disparity in Connexions services across the country. Many services have incorporated areas that Connexions were not originally intended to cover, such as advice on sexual health and so on. For that reason Connexions has become incredibly stretched in its provision of the sort of advice that young people need when they are looking for career progression.
My noble friend Lord Elton was right to point out the issues facing young people entering the world of employment and the increasing pace of change for those already in employment. There is a great need for an all-age careers service. I thank the Minister for his response, but he failed to satisfy the need for a dedicated all-age advice service. People need a clear point of contact when they are trying to address the challenging changes that they face in the world of employment today. Although Connexions is useful for 14 to 19 year-olds, there must be, given the ever increasing pace of change, a service for all ages. I shall go away and read carefully the details of the Minister’s response. I am not wholly satisfied but, for the moment, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 20 [Appropriate arrangements]:
[Amendment No. 112 not moved.]
Clause 21 [Appropriate arrangements to be in place before employment begins]:
[Amendments Nos. 113 and 114 not moved.]
Baroness Verma moved Amendment No. 115:
“( ) The Secretary of State shall, within 12 months of the coming into force of this section, publish an assessment of the implications of the duty imposed by this section on the employment prospects of 16 and 17 year olds.”
The noble Baroness said: We deal in this amendment with two concerns that we heard clearly expressed in meetings with various interested parties and by the Institute of Directors and Professor Alison Wolf. The
3 July 2008 : Column 441
“Government figures estimate that the process of employer checking is a single exchange of paper between an employee and employer, which will take just 10 minutes. In reality this process will actually require a mixture of discussion, checking, altering of work quotas and/or addressing employees’ needs”.
The IoD projects that the cost will be double the Government’s estimate. The top estimate that it mentioned to us was £68 million per year. It is understandably a matter of great concern to small and medium-sized businesses, those that are the least able to absorb the extra costs of additional regulation and red tape.
Our second concern is the flipside to the first. The consequential unintended impact of the clause could be that employers employ only those who are older than those covered by the proposed compulsory age, an argument articulated by Professor Alison Wolf. They would simply bypass the risk of falling foul of the law by avoiding employing the very people whom we are trying to help. As the owner of such a business, I can tell the Committee that it is difficult to keep on top of all the regulations and laws that must be obeyed. It would therefore not be surprising if businesses simply sought to save themselves more bother and expense.
As my noble friend Lady Morris said on Second Reading, it would be a tragedy if the Bill’s consequence was to make it even harder for young people to enter into employment. We therefore think it crucial that the Bill should make provision for keeping the matter under review. We have already proposed a new clause that would set up an annual consultation with the organisations that represent the bulk of private employers, so that the Government have direct contact with the businesses that we hope to engage with the Bill. The Minister in another place gave an undertaking that the Government intend to conduct reviews such as the one that I suggest. Can the Minister please give us more detail on that to reassure those of us who—quite reasonably, I think he will agree—have concerns about the issue? I beg to move.
Baroness Sharp of Guildford: We on these Benches have some sympathy with the amendment but do not go wholly along with the wording. We, too, were influenced by Professor Alison Wolf’s critique of the Bill when it was first introduced in January, and by her fears regarding the good learning experience that some of these young people are presently getting when they go into a job. They may not necessarily acquire accredited qualifications in their first two years of learning, but they learn a great deal about how to hold down a job. The skills that they learn on the job may not be accredited but they are very worth while. This is the group of young people called not NEETs but NETs—those not in education or training. These young people are in work but they are not getting any training at work. Some 20 to 30 per cent of young people leave school at the age of 16; roughly 10 per cent are NEETs and roughly 10 per cent NETs.
Alison Wolf seems to be saying in her article that we should not write off the training that these young people receive even though it is not accredited. In
3 July 2008 : Column 442
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |