Use of language matters.ÌýThe devil is in the detail. Input is important –Ìýbut outcomes matter even more.
These were the phrases going through my head as the government –Ìýembellished with Boris Johnson’s idiosyncraticÌý rhetoric – launched itsÌýLifetime Skills GuaranteeÌýyesterday, central to plans it says will "transform the training and skills system, making it fit for the 21st-century economy."
Well, a start is something –Ìýeven if the boast that "adults without an A level or equivalent qualification will be offered a free, fully funded college course"Ìýturns out to be the reinstatement of what prevailed until 2013 when George Osborne scrapped grants and made everyone over 23 take out advanced learner loans. HalfÌýof the funding for those loans then went backÌýto the Treasury, year onÌýyear, unused.
Background:ÌýBoris Johnson to announce 'Lifetime Skills Guarantee'
Boris Johnson: End 'pointless, nonsensical gulf' between FE and HE
DfE:ÌýApprenticeships advice for adults not good enough
Many of the million adult learners lost in the past decade were from FE, put off by this and other changes. As shadow minister for skills at the time, I spoke to dozens of adult college learners countrywide, many of them women who told me they could not have got their qualifications –Ìýand subsequent jobs –Ìýwithout their grants, fearful of being laden with loan debt.
Investing in adult education and skills
The government has decked outÌýits proposals by repeating observationsÌýfrom the Augar report (now 16 months old) but echoing the languageÌý(and in places filching it) from the Lifelong Learning Commission‘sÌýrecommendations made to Labour last November. As the person who coordinatedÌýthe commission, I might be comforted by the old phrase "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" –Ìýif it were true.
But the government’s proposals, as well as being thin on new funding initiatives, are also light on detail. What there is raises more questions than answers. The free college coursesÌýcome with strings attachedÌý –Ìý"skills valued by employers", of which we are toldÌýa list of approved courses will "be available shortly".
What does that mean? Who is going to decide what are the skillsÌý employers value? Whitehall?ÌýThe Education and Skills Funding Agency? Or the minister of the day – with shades of the micromanagement of schools curricula favoured when Michael Gove was education secretary?
If that’s the way it goes, then the "Lifetime Skills Guarantee"Ìýwill be aÌývery poor substitute for the "universal, publicly funded right to learn through life, with a minimum entitlement to fully funded local level 3 provision, andÌýthe equivalent of sixÌýyears publicly funded creditsÌýat level 4 and above"Ìýlaid out by the Lifelong Learning Commission.
Other elements in this government’s proposals –Ìýflexibility in how training is structured, more funding for SMEs on apprenticeships, and promoting higher tech qualifications –Ìýmay be useful in themselves. But, in reality, there is no overarching strategy for the progression we desperately need now.
There are still no answers as to how the new tech courses at level 4 and 5 that the DfE announced over the summer will work. HowÌýwill they rub alongÌýwith T levels?ÌýWho will train the trainers for them? And how do you avoid –Ìýas the concern has been with degree apprenticeships – learners from disadvantaged backgrounds missing out? How do you linkÌýprogressionÌýto them if there is no pipeline to improve basic skills and level 2 participation (both areas where the government ‘s record is dismal)?
We need to developÌýshort, sharp targeted skills programmes to get people retrained swiftly to face new challengesÌý – AI, the green agenda on renewables, automation. RapidÌýaction was needed even before Covid-19, andÌýnow the pandemic has turbocharged this. But there’s little sense of how to do this in the government‘s proposals. Over 60 per cent of training and apprenticeships starts are carried outÌýby independent providers, but there’s scant recognition of their role.
We also need longer in-depth degree programmes to give older learnersÌýthe generic enabling skills they will need to navigate rapid changes in their jobs and careers.ÌýEmployers consistently ask for theseÌýbut there’s littleÌýrecognition of how to achieve that in the government’s proposals.
Instead, we are offered a tired,Ìýtop-down delivery view, withÌýthe same old mantrasÌýabout more capital coming out of the same pots of money. Yes, we do need investment in capital, but not just new buildings that ministers can cut a ribbon for,Ìý but human capital,Ìý for both skills teachers and FE learners in areas and sectors where existing skills are low and have been neglected, and where unemployment is now soaring high. Ìýlooked holistically at how those elementsÌýcan be blended together – but the government’s response seems to be a one-trick pony.
What about the self-employed, not least in service sectors likeÌýhealth, hospitality, the creative sectors, who are losing their jobs by the bucketful?ÌýWhy is there no engagement with the trade unions, whoseÌýlearning reps have shown they can play a critical role In encouraging tens of thousands of their members down new routes?
Finally, who is actually going to deliver this so called transformation in skillsÌýfor adult learners?ÌýThe failure toÌýengage with sub-regional partners, councils and public and private sector stakeholders, elected mayors and combined authorities to deliver this suggests it will be more of the Whitehall micromanagement that has failed in the past,Ìýwith (as in previous ministerial initiatives ) little contact or consultation with those groups.
DemandÌýis just as criticalÌýas supply toÌýgood outcomes forÌýthe hundreds of thousands of people needing new skills. ButÌýmanagement on the ground is critical for this. The LLCOM report recognised the need for virtuous circles of cooperation locally –ÌýandÌýthe ability to learn from pilots. There’s little of that thinking here.
In the pandemic that we are now enduring, prioritising and targeting key groups and places left behind is everything. But as with chancellor Rishi Sunak’s autumn statement, there has been no engagement with that strategy.
What will these proposals doÌýfor the people of Blackpool, my former constituency, where nearly 10 per centÌýof the working-age population is nowÌýhaving to exist on benefits, orÌýfor the many other coastalÌýand inland towns braced for further job losses?
We need initiativesÌýto stimulate and create demand –ÌýlikeÌýthe proposals just put forward for the government’s spending reviewÌýby City and Guilds, Future LearnÌýand the Prince's Trust.ÌýThey advocate £60 million investment over the next three years to fast track skills for re-employment using local employment and training hubsÌýcountrywide.
City and GuildsÌýsayÌýthese could upskillÌý2 millionÌýpeople between 2021 and 2023. They see the ability –Ìýlike the Open University that I once worked for as a course tutor –Ìýto piggyback on a blend of online and face-to-face courses (when circumstances permit)inÌý evening and weekendÌýsettings, sweatingÌýthe existing assets of schools, colleges and other institutions, without governmentÌý spendingÌýmillions of pounds on new builds that could be better used for support grants, which are key to getting older would-be learners back on track
These are practical steps that could help energise this ragbag of government proposals. Right now, however, those resemble the actors inÌýthe absurdist play by the Italian writerÌýPirandello - "Six Characters in Search of an Author".
Gordon Marsden was shadow minister for FE, HE and skills from 2015-19 and is a former MP for Blackpool South
