The diagnosis is, broadly speaking, correct. The UK is bad at vocational education for teenagers and adults. For a combination of reasons, with snobbery high on the list, we have long taken pride in our world-famous universities. By contrast, we undervalue technical qualifications of all sorts, and treat the training offered to the half of the population that doesn’t go to university as an afterthought – when we remember to think of it at all. If proof is needed, it is provided by figures showing that over the past decade, college budgets have been cut harder than any other area of education.
This problem has been recognised for years. Compared with many other countries, notably Germany, the various arms of the British state have been poor at working with employers and others to invest in the skills and training that are required to build a productive economy in the long-term national interest. Marketisation of the sector, which removed colleges from the control of councils, served to weaken the kinds of structures that in other countries are responsible for regional economic planning.
A recent white paper and interim response to the review carried out by Philip Augar for Theresa May offers a remedy (since this area of policy is mostly devolved, the proposals relate to England). For Boris Johnson’s government, improving the life chances of millions of people in less affluent areas, where fewer 18-year-olds progress to university and job prospects are less good for those who do, is politically crucial.
The strongest new pledges, taken from the Augar report, include £1.5bn in capital funding to upgrade colleges and a new loan entitlement, which means everyone – not just university students – will be able to borrow to train or study. The point is to give all adults the chance to undertake four years of post-18 education, with new higher technical qualifications coming shortly. Also welcome are promises to simplify college funding and invest in teaching.
However, these steps in the right direction are undermined by the leisurely pace at which they are to be taken. The Augar review is almost two years old. Now, new loans are deferred until 2025. Given the scale of the unemployment crisis that is unfolding, with the number of jobless people predicted to rise from 1.8 million to 4 million, and younger workers particularly hard-hit, a far greater sense of urgency is needed. When it comes to pledges on teaching, the failure to acknowledge the impact of years of cuts is disingenuous, to put it mildly.
Even more concerning is the undemocratic structure proposed for the future. If we are serious, as a nation, about building a workforce to enable our transition to a green economy, and equip our health, care and digital sectors for the decades ahead, private and public bodies must work together. This was a mammoth task even before the pandemic. But the white paper skims over key questions of accountability, noting the role of mayoral combined authorities, but saying nothing about councils. Instead, it says central government should step in where there are problems, while employer leadership of the new local skills improvement plans, described in the white paper, should be statutory.
In short, the government looks like it is seeking to outsource responsibility for education to businesses, while hoarding yet more power in London. It has put off any funding announcements until the spending review later this year. While any attempt to rebalance our education system towards less privileged young people must be welcomed, there are many aspects of these reforms about which ministers should think again.
