Tackling intergenerational unfairness Contents

Chapter 4: Educating generations for the 100-year life

116.One in three of today’s babies will live to see their 100th birthday.149 This stark demographic fact, whilst being a positive reflection of modern lifestyles and technology, has profound implications for our working lives. The three-stage model of life created in the 20th century of ‘education, work, retirement’ is no longer suitable with the prospect of careers that may span over 60 years.150 We need to think in much more multifaceted terms: more of us will have a multistage career, where we will need to frequently update what we are learning to make this possible. We are not adequately educating today’s young people for their longer working lives. Access is scarce to quality education and adequate funding outside of full-time undergraduate university education up to age 21. In the current system, too many young people do not get the right skills to start with and then, as they grow older, do not have access to the skills training they need to stay employable in a changing workplace. The Economist Intelligence Unit rated the UK tenth out of 50 economies in its ‘Worldwide Educating for the Future Index’, behind countries such as Canada, the Netherlands, Germany and France.151

Education in schools

117.Young people face a range of financial decisions early on in life, for which they need to be adequately prepared. This matters on both a personal and societal scale: better informed citizens would be able to make informed financial decisions that support the functioning of the economy. Participants in our Contact Group also expressed a desire for a broader education for young people, including the non-academic skills they would need after leaving school. These concerns came from across the age ranges. We heard from Lewis Addlington-Lee, Deputy Chair of the British Youth Council, that young people want:

“a proper curriculum for life, by which I mean a curriculum that not only provides people with learning around the core subjects but teaches young people about things like mortgages and taxation and first aid.”152

118.The provision of financial education has been the source of much attention in recent years.153 It is not our wish to overburden schools, many of whose resources are already stretched to breaking point. Universities might seem an obvious point in the lifecourse for this financial education, given that they already provide much practical careers advice and some pastoral care. However, this would exclude the 50 per cent of young people who do not go to university,154 whose routes through life immediately after leaving school are less clear. We believe that all young people should have some basic financial understanding before leaving school at age 16.

119.On our visit to Doncaster, we heard from young apprentices working with St Leger Homes that one of their key concerns was housing and homelessness. They told us that after leaving school they felt they did not know enough about how social renting and the private rental sector worked, or the options available if they had trouble affording housing. One of their key recommendations was that schools should do a better job of preparing young people to deal with the issue of housing when they enter the world of work. The Peabody Trust recommended “more housing education and awareness of welfare benefits and budgeting should be delivered within schools.” It suggested this could be designed by housing providers.155 Local authorities may also be well placed to follow best practice in distributing information about local services that can provide help should young people find themselves in an uncertain financial or housing situation.

120.The Minister of State for Apprenticeship and Skills, the Rt Hon Anne Milton MP, stated that some provision, both compulsory and optional, of financial education was available for schools, saying:

“Financial literacy is compulsory in schools … Schools can include teaching financial education in Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) if they want to. There are a number of online tools … ”156

121.Anne Milton’s statement that financial literacy is compulsory in schools needs some clarification. Financial education is currently split across the Maths and Citizenship curriculums, as well as within the non-statutory element of Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education. Financial education is not compulsory in schools, but rather forms part of the National Curriculum as part of the non-statutory citizenship education taught in local authority-maintained schools, but not free schools or academies. Housing education could come within PSHE. However, the Government provides no standardised frameworks or programmes of study for PSHE and only sex and relationship education within the subject are statutory. We believe the financial aspects to be important, but we understand the risks of overload and that when there is resource pressure, the non-statutory elements are dropped first.

122.Anne Milton also told us that while Ofsted does not have to report on Citizenship, it does report on teaching and that Citizenship “is treated as equal to, the same as, any other subject in school.”157 A previous select committee found that subjects on which Ofsted do not report and are not prioritised in school league tables tend to be neglected by schools.158 Citizenship is therefore not treated in the same way as other subjects that are in the English Baccalaureate or subjects which Ofsted has a statutory duty to inspect, as the Minister suggested. Further to this, the House of Lords Communications Committee, in its report Growing up with the Internet, recommended “that the Government should make PSHE a statutory subject, inspected by Ofsted.”159 We endorse this recommendation.

123.Anne Milton told us she was more concerned about the number of young people leaving school without basic numeracy or literacy skills and that “29 per cent of young people leave school without a good pass in English and Maths. Financial literacy only works if you can do a certain basic level of Maths.”160 Such longstanding failure to deliver basic skills does not excuse sending young people into an independent life improperly equipped.

124.Our intention is not to blame schools or overburden them with preparing students with a financial education. Qualifications in English and Maths must take precedence. However, we must not shy away from empowering young people to feel able to support themselves and their families by equipping them with financial and housing knowledge. Young people need to be able to make sound financial judgements and must have access to good, impartial advice. Otherwise, we risk raising generations of young people who do not understand basic financial processes, particularly those relating to housing and debt.

125.We understand that financial education may be a source of anxiety for teachers, who may not feel they have sufficient expertise in the subject to teach it adequately. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Financial Education for Young People found that only 17 per cent of secondary school teachers have personally received, or are aware that a colleague has received, training or advice on teaching financial education, yet 58 per cent would like to receive more training in this area.161 Efforts need to be made to improve teacher confidence and skills in this area. Schools might look to the wider community to aid them with this. Organisations such as Citizens Advice, local employers and older volunteers may be well placed to engage with young people in schools. Where schools do not have the resources to train teachers in this area, local authorities might be well placed to provide them with information to signpost students to relevant advisory bodies.

126.The Government should ensure that young people are provided with sufficient education about housing and other practical finance matters before leaving school. The Government should make PSHE a statutory subject inspected by Ofsted. Increased housing and financial education within PSHE would be helpful. Local organisations should, where possible, be brought into schools to signpost young people to suitable financial education resources, including relevant advisory bodies.

Further Education

127.After school, the choices young people make about their education have a profound impact on the path their lifecourse will take. The Association of Colleges commented that spending is falling as a share of GDP and that “the root of the problem in state-funded education is public spending restraint at a time when demand and need is rising.”162 Research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) concurs with this assessment on Further Education. They find that school sixth forms have faced budget cuts of 21 per cent per student since their peak in 2010/11 and Further Education colleges have seen a cut of eight per cent per student. They highlight that by 2019/20, funding per young person in Further Education will be around the same as in 2006/07: only 10 per cent higher than it was 30 years earlier in 1989/90. Spending per student in school sixth forms will be lower than at any one point since at least 2002. They also report that total funding for adult education and apprenticeships has fallen by 45 per cent since 2009/10.163 Julian Gravatt, Deputy Chief Executive of the Association of Colleges, told us that the people losing out most as a result of these cuts are those “young adults who do not go to Higher Education, because the Government have found a solution to the funding of Higher Education, which is not really quite there for the other 50 per cent of the age group.”164

128.We have heard that undergraduate degrees have been allowed to dominate post-18 education. This might not be in students’ or the country’s best interest, and it has failed to create an effective market.165 Simon Kelleher, Head of Education and Skills at Policy Connect, gave young people who leave school with very few qualifications at a low level as an example of a challenge facing a particular group, where age intersects with other issues to compound damage.166

129.The complexity of Further Education pathways and funding demonstrates, at a practical level, the undervaluing of the sector compared with Higher Education. University students have a single point of access via the UCAS process, while Further Education students and apprentices must seek out and apply to several individual providers. Matthew Percival, Head of Group, Employment and Employee Relations at the CBI said that, “One of the main things that makes it difficult for people to progress and move up in the labour market is the absence of a ladder of the same strength on technical education as there is on academic qualifications.”167 Paul Johnson, Director at the IFS told us that his one recommendation to the Government would be looking at:

“ … young people going into the labour market who are not going through Higher Education. The more I look at this, the more angry it makes me. There is no clear route through, there are tiny numbers of higher-level apprenticeships for 18 year olds … A lot of them are funnelled into Higher Education where, actually, they may not get very much benefit, and a lot of them find it much easier to get a very low-skilled job rather than to go into a career with appropriate training.”168

130.The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee’s Report, Treating Students Fairly: The Economics of Post-School Education, concluded that “Further Education is the poor relation to Higher Education and its position has been weakened and undermined by reductions to its budgets and a complex funding structure.”169 The Minister of State for Apprenticeships and Skills agreed that there is a long-enduring “intellectual snobbery” surrounding Further Education. We concur with the Minister’s and the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee’s assessment that Further Education is undervalued by society; greater social value and respect should be accorded to those with practical skills. In Doncaster we spoke to young apprentices and participants on the St Leger Homes World of Work (WoW) programme, who had faced stiff competition in applying for their apprenticeships and were learning specialist trades such as roofing and engineering. They stressed the opportunity and self-esteem gained by having these skills. The value of such technical and craft skills cannot be overstated.

131.One specific form of Further Education is apprenticeships. There have been many changes in apprenticeship policy since 2015. The Association of Colleges stated that there “are good reasons for each individual change though negative consequences from some. Implementing several big changes at the same time has a disruptive impact in a cumulative way.”170 In 2015, the Government created a 2020 vision strategy for apprenticeships. This included the aspiration that apprenticeships would become “a high quality and prestigious route path to a successful career”171 available in all parts of the country, in all sectors and at all levels. These policy changes are detailed in Box 2 below.

Box 2: Changes in apprenticeship policy since 2015

The Apprenticeship Levy (2015)

Around 20,000 employers with payrolls above £3 million pay £2.6 billion a year to HMRC. This means that public spending on apprenticeships is now funded by a tax on employers rather than from general taxation.

Digital Apprenticeship Service (2016)

Levy paying employers can register on the Digital Apprenticeship Service (DAS) and access an account which allows them to allocate up to 110% of their levy payments and use these to commission apprenticeship training. Levy funds expire after 24 months. From April 2018, levy paying employers can transfer 10% of their levy funds to another employer under certain conditions.

New apprenticeship funding system

The Education and Skills Funding Agency introduces a new funding formula, a new register and a new rulebook for training including requirements for 20 per cent off-the-job training for all apprenticeships and a minimum 10 per cent fee for apprentices in smaller non-levy paying employers.

Training content

A new regulator, the Institute for Apprenticeships oversees a programme to introduce new apprenticeship standards to replace all existing frameworks. There are 562 apprenticeship standards in development, 277 of which are approved for delivery. All new apprenticeships involve end-point assessment by external organisations.

Source: Written evidence from the Association of Colleges (IFP0044)

132.We have heard of the difficulty that employers, particularly SMEs, face in navigating this system. The Chairman of the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, Lord Forsyth, suggested that smaller businesses face difficulty in taking on apprentices because “they need to be provided with the means—with local colleges—so that they can do this, knowing what they have to do and how to do it, and be given advice.”172 Lina Bourdon, Chair of the Diversity Policy Unit at the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) told us that 25 per cent of small businesses would consider taking an apprentice on board, but they are deterred by “complexity, paperwork, a lack of clarity on how to approach it and cost.”173 We also heard from Matthew Percival that the apprenticeship levy has restricted the budget flexibility that businesses have in hiring apprentices, meaning fewer are hired.

133.The Government announced a number of reforms to apprenticeship funding in the 2018 Budget. These included £695 million to support apprenticeships, increases in the apprentice minimum wage and the transfer cap and a decrease in small business’ apprenticeship fees, from 10 per cent to five per cent.174 The Government has also announced the creation of T-levels, which will be taught from September 2020 and are designed to provide a technical education equivalent to A-levels. A report by Policy Exchange on the introduction of T-levels is sceptical, however, that the lessons have been learnt from previous attempts at introducing technical education qualifications, particularly in how T-levels are supposed to link to apprenticeships.175 In 2018 the Government announced the ‘Augar Review’ of post-18 education and funding. This is due to report in ‘early 2019’. We look forward to the results of the review and hope that they will address the clearly inadequate funding of vocational and Further Education.

134.In its 2019 report on the apprenticeships programme, the NAO found that recent reforms in the apprenticeship programme mean that the Department for Education “now has a better, more holistic approach to assessing the benefits of the programme.”176 However, it finds that the Government is very unlikely to meet its target of three million apprenticeship starts by 2020. Most worryingly, one third of apprentices covered by inspections in 2017/18 were being trained by providers rated by Ofsted as ‘inadequate’ or ‘requires improvement’. This does a disservice to those young people entering the world of work, or those apprentices who are reskilling for a longer working life.

135.The apprenticeship system is confused. It is not adequately serving young people or apprentices retraining later in life. Apprenticeships should develop skills for those who need them, including routes to technical and craft careers. Resources raised via the levy should not be used to rebadge training that would occur anyway. There is too little monitoring and too little focus on quality and outcomes. We note the number of changes in the system in recent years, but do not believe failed experiments should be used as a pretext for deferring effective reform. The Government must improve the quality of apprenticeships to deliver real skills for lifelong and fulfilling careers and ensure they are focussed on those young people, and re-trainers, who are not well served by other education routes. It must review and remove reported bureaucratic barriers to the provision of apprenticeships by employers.

136.The Government should substantially increase funding for Further Education and vocational qualifications. Many students would be better served by pursuing vocational educational pathways. The current system of funding and access is inefficient, complex and risks perpetuating unfairness between those who access Higher Education and those who do not. We must rebalance the value attributed to Higher Education and Further Education.

Higher Education

137.The introduction of high tuition fees for those who choose to pursue Higher Education at universities has put another strain on the intergenerational compact. The first generation of young people who have had to pay for their full-time undergraduate education is entering the workforce having amassed large debts. The participants from our Contact Group who were students, or had children or grandchildren who were students, were especially worried about this. However, tuition fee debt does not function in the same way as other debt and is written off 30 years after the loan is taken out. We heard that mortgage providers treat tuition fee debt more like a tax than a debt.177

138.Most graduates will not pay off the full debt they take on. This is due to two of the elements of the loan system. Graduates only pay contributions on earnings in excess of £25,000. This protects people on low incomes and ensures that those on wages close to the UK average pay the least. However, throughout the loan period, interest accrues at the unacceptably high rate of RPI plus zero to three per cent. This has a regressive effect as individuals with the highest incomes who pay off all their debt quickly will pay less than many of the others who contribute for the full 30 years.

139.We must ask if these debts are always incurred to practical personal benefit. What particularly concerned the young participants of the Contact Group was the insufficiency of a degree alone in finding employment. There was a mismatch between the jobs they had been expecting and the jobs that were available. Newcastle University Institute of Health and Society also found that young graduates perceived a mismatch between the jobs they were expecting and the low-skill, low paid jobs they were finding.178 Higher Education had been presented to our young Contact Group participants as the only viable route to a good job. Yet it was felt that better available jobs were needed to justify going to university and incurring large debts. The issue of unpaid internships and the ‘extras’ necessary to find a job was brought up, due to the crowding of graduate markets. This perspective of the qualified utility of the university path for many was corroborated by many pieces of written evidence that we received.179

140.Research conducted by the IFS finds that the relative labour market returns for graduates vary significantly depending on course and institution. It finds that graduates from Russell Group universities have earnings 10 per cent higher on average for women and 13 per cent higher on average for men than graduates of other institutions with the same observable characteristics. The highest performing courses also offer earning returns of around double the average degree, while the lowest performing courses offer returns around 40 per cent below the average degree for women and 50 per cent below the average for men.180 The think tank Onward similarly found that “university represents extremely poor value for money for some graduates”, with 40.6 per cent of graduates in 2016–17 studying subjects with expected median earnings of less than £25,000 (the repayment earnings threshold) after five years.181 In a 2017 report, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) concluded that for graduates outside of vocational subjects such as medicine, dentistry and veterinary studies, and STEM subjects, it is questionable whether the benefits of getting a degree outweigh the costs.182

141.Nevertheless, we accept that the value of Higher Education is not easily quantifiable. A liberal, open-minded education should produce intelligent graduates with the necessary enterprising and creative skills to make a success of employment and to deal with complexity, diversity and change. Our serious concern is that the potentially higher value of alternative pathways for many individuals, and access to the wider labour market, is not sufficiently recognised, or supported.

142.The qualifications that young people leave education with do not always match the needs of the labour market. Post 16 educational providers and the bodies that regulate them should seek to link educational outcomes more closely to the labour market.

Lifelong learning

143.Concern over poor vocational education is not restricted to young people. There are fewer people involved in continuing education, a recognised key pathway to help adults retrain,183 and part-time Higher Education participation is plummeting. The concept of lifelong learning is regressing at a time when we need skilled people of all ages to gain employment, a situation that is made even more pressing when considered in the context of the 100-year life. We heard from Dr Eliza Filby, Visiting Fellow at King’s College London, that the education received at age 21 is insufficient in equipping people for a working life that may span over 65 years.184 The evidence we heard from Professor Andrew Scott, Professor of Economics of London Business School, supported this, stating that:

“I cannot think of anything that I can learn at 20 that will probably still be relevant when I am 70. We will have to think about a multistage career, where people need to continually change what they are doing and what they are learning. If you impose technological change on this longevity, you can see that the implications for the skills provision are pretty extensive.

There are two main challenges: what do we teach young people if they are going to be working into their 70s, and how do we create a system where people can continually learn and update their skills throughout their life?”185

144.We have heard from young people that they feel insecure because they have not left school with the skills needed for the labour market,186 and employers have painted a similar picture.187 Similarly, older people may feel insecure in the labour market as their skills become outdated without retraining.188 According to the CIPD, the proportion of employees who undergo job-related education or training drops off among employees aged 60 or over.189 Lifelong learning and training may be important in improving productivity, particularly as older people stay in the workforce for longer and become a greater proportion of the workforce.

145.The Government claims it has prioritised reskilling the workforce.190 Yet spending on adult education, outside apprenticeships and offender learning, fell from £2.8 billion in 2010–2011 to below £1.4 billion in 2015–2016.191 In the 2015 spending review, the Government promised to protect the budget at £1.5 billion until 2020, but this is a cut in real terms. Depending on provision level and employment status, many people over the age of 23 have to co-fund their education192 and the funding structure of adult education is set to become more complex, with the Department for Education (DfE) to devolve around £700 million (about 50 per cent of the adult education budget) in 2019–2020 to six Mayoral Combined Authorities and Greater London Authority.193

146.The National Retraining Scheme (NRS) is the Government’s flagship lifelong learning scheme. In the autumn 2018 Budget, the Chancellor pledged £100 million for its first phase, which aims to help adults access lifelong learning and obtain the skills they need for new careers.194 Sinead O’Sullivan, Director of Career Learning, Analysis, Skills and Student Choice from the DfE told us that the scheme is “targeted ideally at adults already in employment who are potentially at risk because they are in a sector that is declining.”195 These sectors are the construction industry and digital sector. Julian Gravatt suggested that adult education was a “very confusing picture” and pointed out that the NRS, which is a DfE-led initiative, works separately to the DWP and that these different programmes are not completely joined up, and are hard for people to access.196

147.The Scheme has been criticised because of the lack of clarity as to whether it is employer led, or participant led. Dr Susan Pember assessed the NRS in March 2018 and concluded that an employer-led NRS would exclude millions of adults who are not employees, including workers on zero-hours contracts, agency and temporary staff.197 Lina Bourdon warned us that those who are self-employed are often an afterthought of policymakers.198 Similarly, the Government’s Fuller Working Lives strategy is employer-led. The Fuller Working Lives strategy profiles the demographic change facing the UK and presents the opportunities and challenges that an ageing workforce has on employers. We strongly believe that the NRS should be able to meet the needs of all adults, regardless of labour market status.

148.Dr Pember’s report concludes that, “the NRS has yet to be assigned a role or its position in the existing 18+ education and training landscape.”199 Both the Minister and Sinead O’Sullivan were unable to give us specific information about the NRS, other than that it was to be ‘bespoke’ and was still in development. We were surprised that the Minister of State for Apprenticeships and Skills remarked that the concept of lifelong learning “strikes fear in my heart and always has done. It does for a lot of people.”200 We disagree.

149.The Government must incentivise people to participate in lifelong learning. How it intends to do this is, like much of the scheme, as yet unclear. Other countries use credit-based systems that allow individuals to use their credits to access training. We believe this may be an option to explore. We were cautioned to be realistic about what employers could do. Other witnesses said that it is important for state-run institutions to be run alongside employer training.201 The Rt Hon The Lord Willetts suggested that Universal Credit provided an opportunity for a monitoring system to target retraining at those who are not in employment and that local jobcentres could run such schemes.202 The Centre for Ageing Better told us that the NRS is a “welcome first step” which should be extended to other sector deals and should also be aligned with funding streams with work and health, to support those facing health-related challenges to working longer to retrain into new, more suitable roles.203

150.The upcoming government review of post-18 education provides an opportunity for the Government to take a wide definition of post-18 education outside of undergraduate degrees. We trust that the Government will use this moment to consider seriously a coherent lifelong learning strategy, of which the National Retraining Scheme may be part.

151.Lifelong learning is a cause for serious concern. We are concerned that existing policy is inadequate and will not meet the need for growth. Lifelong learning over the lifecourse will become more important as more people lead longer working lives. The Government is failing to grasp the scale of lifelong learning required to cater for people living longer and for technological change.

152.The Government’s National Retraining Scheme should be extended and scaled up to prepare for the challenges of an ageing workforce and technological development. This should be targeted throughout the lifecourse and must adequately reach those who are not employees.

153.The Government should consider new incentives to encourage people in lifelong learning. The National Retraining Scheme alone will not suffice. The Government should implement a cohesive lifelong learning strategy following on from the results of the review of post-18 education.

149 Office for National Statistics, ‘What is my life expectancy and how might it change?’: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandlifeexpectancies/articles/whatismylifeexpectancyandhowmightitchange/2017–12-01 [accessed 15 January 2019]

150 Q 57 (Professor Andrew Scott)

151 The Economist Intelligence Unit, ‘The Worldwide Educating for the Future Index 2018: Building tomorrow’s global citizens’: https://educatingforthefuture.economist.com/ [accessed 20 March 2019]

152 Q 163 (Lewis Addlington-Lee)

153 The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Financial Education for Young People recommended strengthening school provision of financial education (APPG on Financial Education for Young People, Financial Education in Schools: Two Years On: Job Done? (May 2016) p 9: https://www.young-enterprise.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/APPG-on-Financial-Education-for-Young-People-Final-Report-May-2016.pdf [accessed 3 April 2019]). The House of Lords Select Committee on Financial Exclusion devoted their attention to the issue of financial education in schools, and found it wanting. (Select Committee on Financial Exclusion, Tackling financial exclusion: A country that works for everyone? (Report of Session 2016–17, HL Paper 132). In November 2018, Martin Lewis OBE and the financial education charity Young Money published the first curriculum-mapped financial education textbook. This was supported, but not funded by the Government. All 3,400 state-funded schools in England received 100 free copies of the textbook.

154 Department for Education, Participation Rates in Higher Education: Academic Years 2006/07–2016/17 (September 2018) p 3: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/744087/Main_text_participation_rates_in_higher_education_2006_to_2017_.pdf [accessed 4 January 2019]. The Higher Education Initial Participation Rate for 2016/17 was 49.8 per cent.

155 Written evidence from Peabody Trust (IFP0023)

156 Q 220 (Anne Milton MP)

157 Q 221 (Anne Milton MP)

158 Select Committee on Citizenship and Civic Engagement, The Ties that Bind: Citizenship and Civic Engagement in the 21st Century (Report of Session 2017–19, HL Paper 118)

159 Communications Committee, Growing up with the internet (2nd Report, Session 2016–17, HL Paper 130)

160 Q 221 (Anne Milton MP)

161 APPG on Financial Education for Young People, Financial Education in Schools: Two Years On: Job Done? (May 2016) p 8: https://www.young-enterprise.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/APPG-on-Financial-Education-for-Young-People-Final-Report-May-2016.pdf [accessed 28 March 2019]

162 Written evidence from Association of Colleges (IFP0044)

163 Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2018 Annual Report on Education Spending in England (September 2018) pp 46–47: https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/comms/R150.pdf [accessed 28 March 2019]

164 Q 57 (Julian Gravatt)

165 Written evidence from Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (IFP0061)

166 Q 57 (Simon Kelleher)

167 Q 186 (Matthew Percival)

168 Q 27 (Paul Johnson)

169 Q 59 (Julian Gravatt)

170 Written evidence from Association of Colleges (IFP0044)

171 Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, English apprenticeships: Our 2020 vision (December 2015) p 10: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/482754/BIS-15-604-english-apprenticeships-our-2020-vision.pdf [accessed 29 March 2019]

172 Q 118 (Lord Forsyth of Drumlean)

173 Q 87 (Lina Bourdon)

174 Budget 2018, p 36, p 61, p 79

175 Policy Exchange, A Qualified Success: An investigation into T-levels and the wider vocational system (February 2019): https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/A-Qualified-Success.pdf [accessed 6 March 2019]

176 National Audit Office, The apprenticeships programme (March 2019) p 11: https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/The-apprenticeships-programme-Summary.pdf [accessed 6 March 2019]

177 Q 12 (Lord Willetts)

178 Written evidence from Newcastle University Institute of Health and Society (IFP0024)

179 Written evidence from Graduate Fog (IFP0027), Older Feminists Network (IFP0032), Young Fabians (IFP0045) and Newcastle University Institute of Health and Society (IFP0024)

180 Institute for Fiscal Studies, The relative labour market returns to different degrees (June 2018) p 38, p 39, p 47: https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/publications/research%20summaries/Graduate%20earnings%20summary.pdff [accessed 22 January 2019]

181 Onward, A Question of Degree (January 2019) p 12: https://www.ukonward.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/J6493-ONW-A-Question-Of-Degree-190104.pdf [accessed 7 January 2019]

182 CIPD, The graduate employment gap: expectations versus reality (November 2017) p 7: https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/the-graduate-employment-gap_2017-expectations-versus-reality_tcm18-29592.pdf [accessed 7 January 2019]

183 Written evidence from Association of Colleges (IFP0044)

184 161 (Dr Eliza Filby)

185 Q 57 (Professor Andrew Scott)

186 Q 163 (Lewis Addlington-Lee). Written evidence from Healthwatch Essex (IFP0011) and Alison Peel (IFP0009). The directors at Doncaster Council and the younger participants in our contact group were concerned about the mismatch in skills obtained in education and those required by the job market.

187 CBI, Skills needs in England: The employer perspective (October 2018): https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2018/skills-needs-in-england-the-employer-perspective.pdf [accessed 3 April 2019]

188 Centre for Ageing Better, A silver lining for the UK economy? The intergenerational case for supporting longer working lives (February 2018) p 32: https://www.ageing-better.org.uk/sites/default/files/2018–02/Silver-lining-UK-economy-crucial.pdf [accessed 7 January 2019]

189 Written evidence from the Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development (IFP0050)

190 HM Government, Industrial Strategy: Building a Britain fit for the future (November 2017) p 11: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/664563/industrial-strategy-white-paper-web-ready-version.pdf [accessed 1 February 2019]. In its 2017 Industrial Strategy White Paper, the Government declared one of its key policies to be reskilling people and “harnessing the power of innovation to help meet the needs of an ageing society”.

191 House of Commons Library, Adult further education funding in England since 2010, Briefing Paper Number 7708, March 2019

192 Education & Skills Funding Agency, Adult education budget: funding and performance management rules (July 2018) p 23: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/733335/2018–19_AEB_funding_pm_rules_July.pdf [accessed 30 January 2019]

193 Written evidence from Association of Colleges (IFP0044). HM Government, Adult education budget (AEB) devolution (November 2018): https://www.gov.uk/guidance/adult-education-budget-aeb-devolution [accessed 29 March 2019]

194 Budget 2018, p 61

195 Q 46 (Sinead O’Sullivan)

196 Q 61 (Julian Gravatt)

197 Dr Susan Pember, Shaping the new National Retraining Scheme (March 2018) p 3: https://www.campaign-for-learning.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=c072b847-c124-4f37-a670-de7d989b1cb9 [accessed 17 January 2019]

198 Q 85 (Lina Bourdon)

199 Shaping the new National Retraining Scheme, p 6

200 Q 215 (Anne Milton MP)

201 Q 88 (Lina Bourdon, Kate Bell)

202 Q 10 (Lord Willetts)

203 Written evidence from Centre for Ageing Better (IFP0049)

© Parliamentary copyright 2019