A mayor’s plan to cut off funding for ESOL classes has received the all-clear from her combined authority’s legal team.
Mayor of Greater Lincolnshire Combined County Authority Dame Andrea Jenkyns plans to withdraw funding for English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses when control of £17-19 million in adult skills funding is devolved next September.
Jenkyns argues the courses don’t benefit the “native” Lincolnshire people she was elected to serve and that the estimated £1 million spent on ESOL provision in the county each year should be directed at English literacy and numeracy.
But in response to fears that cutting ESOL would cause the government to withhold funding from the combined authority, officials took legal advice.
A report detailing the mayor’s plans for adult skills said: “The authority has sought legal advice and the advice received shows that the authority is legally permitted to make these changes.”
The council said “shifting” ESOL provision into “broader learning environments” would create a “more inclusive culture”.
Its report added: “By embedding language support into wider programmes, non-English speakers may benefit from integrated learning experiences that combine language development with vocational or community skills.”
The decision will go before the combined authority’s mayor and representatives of its three constituent local authorities, one led by Reform UK and two that are Conservative-controlled, next week.
If approved by a simple majority, officials will run a formal consultation with residents, training providers and employers ahead of a final decision in February.
Thousands affected
An impact assessment suggests the worst impacted residents include non-English speakers in deprived communities and coastal areas.
In the 2023-24 academic year, about £1 million was spent on delivering ESOL courses to 1,427 residents in the combined authority area.
Diana Sutton, director at the Bell Foundation, which advocates for language teaching for communities to overcome exclusion, said that Greater Lincolnshire’s proposals, “if properly implemented,” could see language support embedded more firmly in skills-based training.
She added: “It is vital that this aspiration becomes a reality.
“However, as stated in the equalities impact assessment, these proposals must also recognise that English language skills are essential for community cohesion, and that there is a need to ensure that there is still some provision available for both refugees and settled communities whose first language is not English.”
Around one million people in Lincolnshire report English as their main language, while 13,490 cannot speak very well and 2,128 cannot speak English “at all”, according to the assessment.
Officials have suggested the new anti-ESOL funding policy could include “exemptions” for recent arrivals with refugee status, and encourage providers to create courses that “focus on employer skills shortages”.
Officials could also provide “targeted support” for the most deprived areas, with providers “incentivised” to ensure residents are aware of available study opportunities.
‘A false economy’
County council Lib-Dem councillor Martin Christopher said ESOL classes weren’t just about “being nice” as they benefit the local and national economy.
He added: “The local Reform-led government here thinks they’re saving cash by cutting the classes, but research proves them wrong – it’s a false economy.
“Experts have shown that for every £1 the government spends on teaching English, they get multiple pounds back.
“Why? Because when people learn English, they get better jobs, earn more money, and pay more taxes.
“By cutting the funding, they are cutting off a huge future income stream for the country.
“It’s like stopping a small investment that would have earned a huge profit.”
Jenkyns did not respond to requests for comment, but a spokesperson for her authority said: “Our priorities are to ensure funding is directed toward upskilling individuals in essential areas such as numeracy and literacy, where the need is greatest.
“This will include an evaluation of existing programmes, including ESOL, to determine how best to meet the needs of our communities.
“We remain committed to promoting inclusive learning opportunities and will continue to consult with stakeholders to ensure any changes reflect both educational priorities and the diverse needs of learners.”
I worked as an ESOL teacher at a college of further education in the NE of England for 20 years until my retirement in 2019. Apart from occasional holidays abroad, almost all of my earnings were spent in the local economy. None of my earnings ended up in off shore investments. ESOL teachers do not earn enough to permit a great amount of savings of any type. The salaries of my five colleagues also ended up circulating in the local economy. Likewise for many of our former students, who as a consequence of our hard work and their own hard work, were equipped to integrate, work, pay taxes and contribute to the UK economy.
Also, not to be too blunt about it, but unless she’s intending to radically change the learner eligibility rules for the region, what will happen is all the people currently attending ESOL classes will just go to FS English classes instead (as already happens in other parts of the country, even without the Big Political Gesture). Whilst they are not the same, they’re not entirely different…
This is a deeply concerning but legally critical distinction. The lawyers’ opinion that the cuts are legally compliant does not make them socially or economically sound policy. While the Mayor’s office may have stayed within its statutory powers, the impact of defunding ESOL is devastatingly shortsighted.
ESOL is not a luxury; it’s fundamental infrastructure for social cohesion and economic participation. Denying new residents the tools to learn English directly undermines their ability to integrate, secure employment, access public services, and contribute fully to the community. The downstream costs in increased social isolation, reduced employability, and greater strain on other public services will likely far outweigh the immediate “savings.”
This legal opinion should be a starting point for public debate, not the end of it. It reveals a policy gap where meeting a bare minimum legal requirement can still result in significant harm. The question for the Mayor and the Combined Authority isn’t just “can we do this?” but “should we do this?” I urge a serious reconsideration, as investing in ESOL is an investment in the region’s future cohesion and prosperity.