Prosperity for all in the Global Economy: World Class Skills

A NIACE response to the Leitch Review of Skills

Published: December 2006

What The Report Recommends

Four Things To Welcome

1. A culture of learning for adults

NIACE welcomes the Review’s recognition of the importance of cultural change. In particular, we support the idea that there should be ‘a new and sustained national campaign to raise career aspirations and awareness of the benefits of learning, backed by local outreach activity. Increasing the appetite and the opportunity to learn’ (page 22).

We will argue that funding for such activity should remain in the hands of national governments (or the LSC in England) as it is inimical with being supported through a demand led mechanism.

2. Challenging targets

NIACE welcomes the Government’s acceptance in the pre-budget report of demanding targets with regard to basic skills and higher education. We particularly support HE targets that are no longer focused upon a particular age cohort (the Club 18-30 approach). In supporting the basic skills target, we will continue to argue that, on the basis of research by John Bynner and Samantha Parsons, greatest attention should be focussed upon adults at pre-entry level 2 because of the impact that this would have for overcoming intergenerational poverty.

Our welcome is however conditional upon there being sufficient resources available to allow the targets to be met. Without a good settlement in the Comprehensive Spending Review, the targets will remain aspirations.

3. Compulsion on the cards

NIACE and others have long advocated the benefits of using the ‘threat’ of government intervention to encourage employers to devise approaches to training and education appropriate to sectoral needs and cultures. This is more likely to result in solutions better fit for purpose than ‘one-size fits all’ centrally driven plans.

The ball is now firmly in the employers’ court. If they prove unable to deliver (despite the efforts of Sir Digby Jones) Government should not hesitate to step in. NIACE will be keen to help Government to determine explicitly where the threshold of acceptability will lie and how progress towards it will be monitored.

4. A national careers service for adults in England

In welcoming this proposal, NIACE urges Government to build upon the framework established by UfI Learndirect. As the new service is established lessons from Wales and Scotland must be learned and particular attention will need to be given to young people when responsibility for their support moves from the Connexions service to the new service.

Four Serious Concerns

1. Demography

Lord Leitch’s interim report was impressive in its demographic analysis (especially when compared to Sir Andrew Foster’s report on FE). It is disappointing, therefore that the final report does not follow this through into the recommendations in as strong a way as might have been expected.

NIACE was concerned not to see encouragement of age-sensitive initiatives to combat skills decay and to motivate and up-skill workers so that they extend their engagement in the workforce. As well as more support for sectoral initiatives that employers might be well-placed to lead, we would expect recognition that the different regions and counties of the UK face different demographic challenges to which geographically-based activity is more appropriate.

Lord Leitch is also curiously silent on migration – both in terms of EU labour market mobility and beyond. This has important implications for supply and demand for English for Speakers of Other Languages – as well as, of course, for economic growth.

2. Free Spirits

For individuals whose career aspirations are aligned totally with the developmental route, identified by their employer, Lord Leitch’s review will be helpful. For those who have bigger or broader ambitions, things may be harder.

Although an expanded system of learner accounts pays lip-service to empowering individual demand, people who work in businesses ‘cool to training’ face steep fee rises if they are to pursue what Ivan Lewis described as ‘the dignity of self-improvement’. NIACE will wish to monitor how the changes affect such learners and also work to ensure that new learning accounts realise their potential.

In addition, if the only affordable courses to receive public funding are those which have been approved by employers then the system cannot be described as ‘learner driven’.

3. ‘Other’ further education

Lord Leitch is concerned to reduce the number of vocational qualifications (currently 6,000+ at level 2). Already the Sector Skills Development Agency is identifying employers’ ‘preferred’ level 2 qualifications (around 1,500) but finding that since a significant proportion of these are not ‘full’ level 2’s, they do not count towards current Public Service Agreement targets!

As Chris Humphries observes, the extraordinary range of first degree subjects seems not to confuse employers but if public funding is to be policed by re-licenced Sector Skills Councils there is a danger that any educational activity outside what they approve will be starved of funding. As well as qualifications that end up outside this ‘magic circle’, other ‘first steps’ learning and outreach may be threatened.

Overall the Leitch review continues to have faith in the primacy of qualifications as the only worthwhile proxy for measuring skills gain – even though research (Unwin, Felstead and others) suggests that what individuals and employers believe matters most – is the tacit knowledge gained on the job. Unless this is better recognised, the country may end up with more qualifications but no corresponding increase in productivity.

4. People who don’t fit

Lord Leitch’s focus is on people in employment or who are registered unemployed. There is also some attention given to policy fault-lines between DfES and DWP. Where the report is less clear though is around others currently outside the workforce who are not registered unemployed and are some distance from the labour market.

These people, exemplified by non-English speaking Bangladeshi women, who are not obviously well served by these recommendations. Similarly, people recovering from mental ill health may need more supported pathways to employment than the report seems to envisage.

One Conundrum

Quite how a demand-led system, driven by employers’ needs sits alongside the planning framework that is to be established through Clause 4 of the Further Education and Training Bill is unclear.

NIACE will be seeking to understand how Regional Economic Strategies, the activities of Regional Development Agencies and the new responsibilities of the London Mayor for adult skills will co-exist with the Leitch dynamic. The dislocation of adult skills policy and 14-19 policy is stark.

One Proposal

We know that the £210m safeguard for personal and community development learning is outwith Lord Leitch’s framework for adult vocational skills.

In order to safeguard first steps provision and also to drive the cultural change agenda, NIACE is considering arguments for having both the remit and the budget for the current safeguard for community learning expanded to include all ‘first steps’ provision – re-integrating what used to be called ‘adult education’, wherever it might be offered. The risk otherwise is that a whole strand of adult learning opportunities – related to work and to the wider world – will be lost, almost accidentally.

Alastair Thomson
alastair.thomson@niace.org.uk
December 2006

Top of page