The troubled 24+ advanced learning loans system for apprenticeships could be axed after just 404 people applied for funding since April’s launch, FE Week can reveal.
The future of the system is, according to an FE Week source, being “considered” by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS).
Latest figures, released last month, showed that of the 52,468 FE loan applications up to October 31, less than 1 per cent were for apprenticeships.
The figure appeared well off target for the government forecasts of 25,000 applications for apprenticeship loans this academic year (by July 31, 2014).
A BIS spokesperson said: “Application numbers indicate that employers and learners are not engaging with loans in apprenticeships.
“We are keeping a close watch on the data and consider the implications for the apprenticeship programme but no decisions have been taken.”
Those who have already successfully applied for a loan, FE Week understands, could be in line for to get their money back if the system was abolished.
Shadow Skills Minister Liam Byrne said: “It’s about time we got to the bottom of why the government is missing its target for supporting adults who are trying to improve their lives, by an unbelievable 90 per cent.
“It’s crucial we back these learners and not leave them in the lurch. So let’s so have some answers fast.”
News of the possible rethink comes after repeated warnings from the likes of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) about the number of apprenticeship loan applications.
A spokesperson for AELP said: “This is very welcome news for the apprenticeship programme.
“Ministers have long said that they want to see more progression within apprenticeships from level two to higher levels and the problem is that loans are acting as a barrier to adults who want to move on to an advanced or high apprenticeship.
The National Union of Students (NUS) has also been a long-standing critic of the system, including through its No to FE fees campaign.
The NUS claimed the system risked putting people off studying and had grave impacts for those aged 24 above who undertake a higher level apprenticeship taking out a loan of up to several thousand pounds so they could essentially pay to work.
Toni Pearce, NUS president, said: “This review is certainly welcome news. We have been committed to campaigning against the introduction of HE-styled loans for students in FE aged 24 and over studying at level three and above ever since this entirely wrong-headed proposal was first put forward.”
She added: “We would urge that this policy is scrapped in its totality as a matter of priority, and call on government to invest in the highly-skilled workforce we need.”
Chris Jones, chief executive of City & Guilds, said: “There were always concerns around 24+ loans, even before they were introduced.
“As we said in our response to the Autumn Statement, too much bureaucracy can be detrimental to the education system, and particularly where apprenticeships are concerned. This is just another example of where bureaucracy has had a negative impact on the system as a whole.
“What we need to see is stability. There have been so many changes and developments in policy of late. All this flip-flopping about with policies is damaging to our education system as a whole and, most importantly, damaging to our learners.”
The Pheasant Inn, in Chippenham, has a lot to answer for in Christine Bullock’s life.
It was where she was once persuaded to take part in a pub crawl around the Wiltshire market town dressed as a ‘push-me-pull-you’ — a double headed pantomime horse — and where she met late husband Bob.
It was also where she had a conversation that would lead her from account management into education — something she said she’d never do.
“I just didn’t see myself as a teacher. I didn’t think I had the right skills,” she says.
Bullock was out for a meal with her then-boss at RHM Bakeries in 1979 when she met Mike Smith, a lecturer in business and economics at Chippenham College and mentioned that she’d done a degree in business studies.
“And he said: ‘We need someone like you at Chippenham College’,” explains Bullock, aged 60.
Inset: Christine Bullock with a fellow charity fundraiser and needlework and fashion lecturer Heather Akers (right), wearing a Push-Me-Pull-You costume in the Pheasant Inn in the early 1980s
“When I asked my boss what he thought he said: ‘Well there are lots of changes coming and I can’t guarantee a job for you in a couple of years’ time’.
“And RHM Bakeries, which was a very big company, disappeared two years later, so he was quite right.”
So Bullock applied for the college role having worked at RHM Bakeries for two and half years after graduating from Leicester University.
“A few years later Mike told me he’d have asked anybody who was anywhere near good because he was so desperate at the time,” she says.
Bullock was born in Great Malvern, Worcestershire.
“But saying I come from Malvern is quite misleading,” she says.
“My father was Serbian, he was a prisoner of war caught by the Germans in the Second World War, and came over here in 1948 as a displaced person.”
I never felt restricted because staying at the college — at the time felt like the right thing to do and I was happy there
Bullock’s father, Zivadin Batachanin, was liberated by American forces, who, unwilling to send him back to newly-communist Serbia, gave him a choice between going to England or Venezuela.
“As he got older he spoke a bit more about the war, but not very often,” she says.
“He was lucky — he was on a farm Stalag so it meant it wasn’t as bad as some.
“In a soft moment he would tell us he would become friends with the German guards, but at times it was quite difficult — I think the food was limited sometimes.
“He did tell us the first night he was captured… they were sat in a field, and if they fell over they were shot, so they held each other up. It’s difficult to imagine it.”
Bullock’s mother, Freda, left home in Nottinghamshire at 16 and joined the Land Army, where she met Zivadin.
“I think that’s why I’ve always been so resilient,” says Bullock.
“I’ve not been through what he’s been through. And my mother is adopted, and I’ve not been through what she’s been through.
“They both did two jobs to make sure we had a nice home.”
Zivadin had just four years of education and taught himself to read and write in English. Bullock says this could be why FE appeals to her.
“Even though my mother had an English education and always worked hard, my father couldn’t help with my homework so I had to do it myself, so I have great empathy with people who come from backgrounds where they have got no help at home,” she says.
After making the leap into FE, Bullock stayed at Chippenham College of Technology for 19 years, apart from a brief stint at Salisbury College.
She describes herself as “ambitious” and was promoted quickly, changing jobs every few years.
“I got to head of department level quite quickly, met Bob and he already had two children so moving from Chippenham was out of the question and the only way to get further in education was to move around, so I stayed in middle management level,” she says.
“I never felt restricted because staying at the college — at the time felt like the right thing to do and I was happy there.”
Eventually, an opportunity came up at Edexcel, which Bullock says was “fantastic”.
She spent the next 15 years zig-zagging between colleges and awarding bodies, taking on vice-principal roles.
However, in 2005, while Bullock was vice principal at City of Bristol College, Bob was diagnosed with lung cancer. He died two years later, six months before his 60th birthday.
“Bob was bedridden for a while,” says Bullock.
“He went a lot sooner than we expected and my principal encouraged me to come back to work as soon as possible which was really good for me, it’s different for everyone but it was good for me and I’ll always appreciate it.”
She adds: “His parents had died at 59 and 58 and he always wanted to make it to 60.
“And Bob had a twin brother, and I wanted him and their parents to be able to celebrate what would have been Bob’s birthday.”
Bullock left City of Bristol College the following August to take up the post of principal at South Leicestershire College.
“Bob had always wanted me to be a principal and I thought I’d carry on to what I was going to do anyway and I think it was good to move on from Bristol then, as a change of scenery,” she says.
Now chief executive of apt awards, Bullock is still ambitious.
“When I first started at Chippenham, a lot of the secretarial lecturers were in their 40s and complaining about getting old, and I thought: ‘I’ll never be like that’,” she says.
“I was 60 two weeks ago, and I am pleased to say that I’m not like they were.
“I have embraced change and I’m trying to hold on, because how you choose to act your age depends on you as a person.
“So yes, I am ambitious. I’m ambitious for wherever I work, I want them to do well — I do things to help learners achieve and to help learners progress.”
This desire to help people learn, she says, is “innate”.
“My father had it, my late husband was like that — looking after people — and my new partner, Rob, is like that too,” she explains.
“You can be ambitious for money and although we all know money’s nice, there are ambitions for your principles and your beliefs as well, and that’s quite important.”
———————————————————————————————–
It’s a personal thing
What’s your favourite book?
Great Gatsby by F Scott Fitzgerald
What did you want to be when you grew up?
I kept changing my mind. First of all it was a solicitor and then it was a market researcher. The last thing I wanted to do was go into education
If you could have anyone to a dinner party, living or dead, who would it be?
Nelson Mandela. I’d have said that before he died as well. I’d probably invite some great sportsmen — David Beckham, Glenn Hoddle, tennis player Ilie Năstase, cricket player Basil D’Oliveira — and then William Shakespeare, Robbie Williams and Paul Newman, because he was lovely. And of course, my partner and family
What’s your pet hate?
Discrimination, bullying and arrogance
What do you do to switch off from work?
We laugh a lot at work — that’s quite important. At home, watching sport, walking, holidays, going to pubs and listening to music
Local employer needs are not being met by the FE and skills sector, according to this year’s Ofsted annual report.
Despite higher expectations of students and improved teaching and learning providing “grounds for optimism” about the sector, it was delivering “too much provision that is not responsive to local employment needs”.
“This provision is therefore inappropriate for young people, regardless of the quality of teaching,” said the report, launched on Wednesday (December 11).
It said there was no structure, accountability measure or system of incentives to ensure that FE and skills provision adapted to local economic and social needs.
“If the government is committed to raising employment through better skills and to secure economic competitiveness, it will need to fill this gap in strategic accountability urgently,” said the report.
It added: “The ability to judge the true effectiveness of provision will depend, among other things, on the availability of robust data on learners’ destinations.”
Ofsted director of FE and skills Matthew Coffey told FE Week: “The one clear message from this year’s annual report is about local accountability. It’s about meeting the needs of local employers — that’s got to be the number one priority.
“Providers need to look at their curriculum — does it match the local needs and how can you demonstrate that it does?”
Ofsted Regional map. CLICK HERE FOR FULL SIZE
The report went on to reveal plans for a review of how provision meets local needs and a Data Dashboad to “ensure governors have accessible data to hold leaders and managers to account”.
It also called for greater sector representation on local enterprise boards (Leps), saying: “Only around one third of all Leps had a direct representative of FE and skills on the Lep board.”
Mr Coffey said: “Last year we were very critical about the quality of teaching in particular. It wasn’t good enough. It wasn’t consistent enough within an individual institution, but across institutions the variability was also marked. We identified 13 providers that were judged to be inadequate and we had no outstanding ones — that was the benchmark of last year.
“And our new inspection framework focussed even more on teaching and learning so I’m delighted that this year we’ve identified a number of outstanding providers and they’ve all got outstanding for teaching, learning and assessment. So there are grounds for optimism.”
But the report also pointed to a number of large colleges that had fallen from good or outstanding over the last year. Such colleges would include Liverpool, Coventry and Bristol. “These must be a priority for the new FE Commissioner,” said the report.
Meanwhile, a review of study programmes, including traineeships as a “bridge to apprenticeships,” was also announced in the report, which said apprenticeships were not taking off for young people. “Many young people are applying for an apprenticeship, but are not sufficiently employable,” said the report, adding: “Too many providers do not work closely enough with employers and, consequently, apprentices fail to get the right training. This year, we judged 9 per cent of apprenticeship provision to be inadequate — this is far too high.”
It continued: “Employers must … be supported in committing a greater number of apprenticeship places, especially for those under the age of 19.”
See feweek.co.uk for an exclusive annual report interview with Mr Coffey.
Tia Riddle spent her teenage years in care and hit rock bottom when she almost died from a drugs overdose. But she has turned her life around with the help of a local college, writes Paul Offord.
n award-winning student who was expelled from five schools before her sixteenth birthday said college had “saved” her life.
Tia Riddle, aged 20, capped off a whirlwind 11 months in FE by triumphing in the Prince’s Trust London and the South East Celebrate Success Awards.
She was given the Breakthrough Award for her impressive work on the Team programme, a 12-week course run by the trust at City College Brighton and Hove, which aims to boost the skills and confidence of unemployed young people.
The glamorous surroundings at Arsenal Football Club’s Emirates Stadium, where the ceremony was held, emphasised how far Tia had come in such a short space of time.
She endured a traumatic childhood which saw her placed into care when she was 12 years old.
She lived with a string of foster families and was expelled from five schools, before leaving education without any GCSEs at the age of 15.
Her life descended into a cycle of unemployment, depression and drug abuse and she hit rock-bottom when she overdosed a year ago on a potentially toxic combination of drugs, including cocaine.
Salvation came when she moved from Northampton to Brighton and started at City College in January.
Tia said: “Approaching the college basically saved my life. I stopped using cocaine and other drugs and they advised me to start on the Team programme.
“It was the first time I had been in a classroom for five years. That was a bit of a shock at first, but mixing with other students helped rebuild my confidence.”
Tracy Hill, Team programme manager at the college, said: “Tia became one of the strongest and most responsible members in the group. Her patience, positivity, self-confidence and time-keeping improved dramatically.
“She is a lovely young lady who has come a very long way and is still looking to better herself. We are very proud of her.”
The course allowed Tia to improve her CV through work experience at an old people’s home and community work repainting a boxing gym.
She has now started a traineeship at the college, which involves her working on reception at the college’s front desk and in its beauty salon.
She is also studying GCSE maths and English one day a week as part of the course.
Tia said: “I had a difficult start in life but I finally came to the realisation that I wanted and needed an education, a routine, stability and confidence.
“I used to struggle with learning. You have to sit with me and explain things and I didn’t get that in a class of 30 people. When I didn’t understand,
I would misbehave.”
She added: “College has been very different from school, where the teachers didn’t try to understand why I was acting the way I was.
“They can see the challenges you are facing here and try to help.
“I always found that the only job I could get without any qualifications was as a cleaner and I didn’t want to do that all my life.
“Going back to college has given me a chance to change things for the better.”
Main photo: Tia Riddle at the ceremony with Steve Reay from HSBC, which sponsored her award
The move towards greater employer involvement in FE and skills is gaining momentum. But with employer providers having come in for less than inspiring Ofsted gradings of late, should we be questioning the wisdom of such a shift?
It’s just over a year ago that former Dragons’ Den investor Doug Richard (pictured left) said apprenticeship funding should go straight to employers, who can spend the money on training as they see fit.
His recommendations prompted a government review that Skills Minister Mathew Hancock indicated would conclude in his favour.
And that came before Chancellor George Osborne, in his Autumn Statement, confirmed employers would be directly funded for apprenticeships through Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.
Is it really realistic for employers to drive development and delivery of apprenticeships?
Just last month too, BAE Systems group managing director Nigel Whitehead (pictured) said employers should be more involved in the design of qualifications, after all, they know what they require of learners.
Even without mention of the government’s Employer Ownership of Skills (EOS) pilot and the recommendations of Labour’s Skills Taskforce, it is safe to say there is cross-party agreement that employers should be more actively involved in the training of tomorrow’s workforce.
But is there a warning in the business philosophy of the late Apple chairman and chief executive Steve Jobs? He is said to have been of the opinion that it was better to do one thing well than to do dozens of things poorly.
Is Kwik Fit, for example, better off repairing cars and vans than thinking about how best to teach apprentice mechanics English and maths?
Or would it be wiser for G4S to concentrate on fulfilling its security contracts instead of developing the latest apprenticeship framework?
And the results of Ofsted’s six employer provider inspections since September are a cause for concern about quality as the FE and skills sector heads towards (EOS).
Government contractor G4S Care and
Justice Services and Intercontinental Hotels Group Services Company, which incorporates Crowne Plaza and Holiday Inn among others, were branded inadequate, while Kwik Fit requires improvement, as do Priory Central Services Limited, Staffline Recruitment Limited and Housing 21. The overall grades reflect the respective ratings on apprenticeships delivery.
That’s nearly 1,300 learners whose training is less than good.
Phil Hatton (pictured below), learning improvement consultant and former Ofsted inspector, said: “Writing qualifications and training materials well, to reflect employer needs and to give transferable skills, is not as easy as many obviously think, nor is delivering the training effectively.
“Given that the government will also want maths and English included, and schools have only 60 pass rates for GCSEs, is it really realistic for employers to drive development and delivery of apprenticeships?
“Kwik Fit clearly know its business well, but has just dropped from outstanding to requires improvement, yet it would be a key employer in developing qualifications for its industry — one which includes many smaller employers who will not have the experience of delivering training.”
Terry Barnett, managing director of Hawk — the first grade one independent learning provider under Ofsted’s current inspection regime, said: “This [EOS] could be devastating. Somebody needs to blink — the baby is about to be thrown out with the bathwater and the plumbing, too.
“It could create a situation that would take a decade to sort out. Lots of people out there don’t want this — the system’s not as broken as people think it is.”
It’s a concern not lost on Association of Colleges president Michele Sutton (pictured right). Opening the association’s recent annual conference in Birmingham, she said: “If we compare this year’s marked improvement for college Ofsted outcomes, to some employer-led apprenticeships outcomes, I think there should be some questions to ministers around the fitness for purpose of some large employers to be a lead position in the new employer-led landscape.”
But there is interest in getting involved in skills from the business community.
Neil Carberry, Confederation of British Industry director for employment and skills, said: “The idea you can meet the apprenticeships challenge without businesses themselves ensuring the training is commercially-relevant to the firm is a fallacy.
“The way to do this is by giving employers the power to procure high quality training through a vibrant and well-regulated market. A command economy, driven by the government, won’t raise standards.”
And Alexander Jackman, head of policy at the Forum of Private Business, said: “The Ofsted results may well be indicative of some of the larger employers.
“But I would like to think that the smaller ones, who are doing things on a much smaller scale, are able to offer something a little more bespoke. They too need government support in this area.
“Employers know best what skills gaps they have in their organisations so the movement towards funding them directly is the right one.
“However, this is a big shift in how funding works so the EOS will take time to get right.
“We would ask that government continues to support businesses to make sure they adapt to the new system and make it a success.”
And it would be unfair to tarnish all employer providers with the ‘less-than-good’ brush.
After all, before September there were a dozen good ones, plus an outstanding one, dating back to September last year (although there were a further six grade threes and three more grade fours).
And in the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, it seems EOS has powerful friends.
So where does that leave us? Only time will tell, but if the experience of Mr Hatton — joint author of the first NVQ — is anything to go by, then caution is needed.
“Back in 1987 when the first NVQ was being developed the first attempts written mainly by employers were all over the place and rejected as not fit for purpose,” he said.
Do employers even want to take ownership of skills?
There are three big problems with the government’s plans to give more responsibility for the skills agenda to employers — also known as employer ownership of skills (EOS for short).
The first is the assumption that employers actually want to take ownership of skills. Pilots overseen by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills suggest they do.
But the funds involved are small compared with the overall skills budget, and only a tiny minority of employers have got involved so far.
David Harbourne
The majority of employers — especially small firms — have stayed away in droves. Given the choice, I have no doubt that most businesses would prefer colleges and training providers to carry on managing both the funding and the form-filling on their behalf.
It’s worrying that in September and October six successive Ofsted reports produced grade three and four results for employer providers
Second, employers that contract directly with the Skills Funding Agency to deliver apprenticeship training don’t always achieve outstanding results.
It’s worrying that in September and October six successive Ofsted reports produced grade three and four results for employer providers.
Third, apprenticeships are meant to be a three-way partnership. Employers get people with skills to do jobs right here, right now. Apprentices get that too, plus transferable skills, knowledge and experience to help them move up the career ladder. The tax-payer gets a skilled workforce which boosts productivity and GDP.
By putting one of the partners in the driving seat, EOS risks silencing the voice of the apprentice, and ranking short-term employer interests over the long-term interests of the economy as a whole. And that would be a real mistake.
David Harbourne, director of policy and research, Edge Foundation
The Education Funding Agency has announced plans to save £150m by paying 17.5 per cent less for the full-time education of 18-year-olds in comparison with 16 and 17-year-olds.
The current, unweighted, funding rate for 16, 17 and 18-year-olds is £4,000. The new rate for 16 and 17-year-olds is expected to be announced in March, but at the current rate 18-year-olds would be funded at £3,300.
The agency said the Spending Review for 2015-16 meant that savings were required from the 16 to 19 participation budget that year.
It said the cut would come into force for 2014/15, by which time, it argued, most 18-year-olds would not need “as much non-qualification provision within their study programmes” because they will have already benefited from two years of post-16 education.
But it is estimated that the move would affect 100,000 18-year-olds in colleges, plus those in school sixth forms and studying foundation course in universities.
It has angered Association of Colleges chief executive Martin Doel, who has raised the issue with Education Minister David Laws and said: “By definition these are the students who need extra help, not less.”
Nevertheless, it would, it is believed, save the agency — and the Department for Education (DfE) — around £150m.
A letter from the agency outlining the cut said: “Because we are operating within a fixed budget, we will confirm the national funding rate per student for 2014/15, and the flat rates for disadvantaged students without GCSE Grade C or above in English or maths in March, when we know the total student numbers we need to fund in 2014/15. In order to realise the required savings for 2015-16, it is necessary to make a start in 2014/15.
“Ministers have decided to make the savings required in 2014/15 by reducing the participation requirements for full-time 18-year-olds, as defined by their age at the start of the academic year.
“Most 18-year-olds will already have benefited from two years of post-16 education and will not therefore need as much non-qualification provision within their study programmes as 16 and 17-year-olds.
“Fewer than one in five of 16 to 18-year-olds funded by the agency are aged 18 at the start of the academic year, although clearly this will vary by institution.
“The funding rate for full-time 18-year-old students in 2014/15 will be 17.5 per cent below the rate for full-time 16 and 17-year-olds. This will apply to all elements of the formula except the flat rates for disadvantaged students without GCSE grade C or above in English or maths, recognising the importance of English and maths for disadvantaged 18-year-olds.
“Students with a learning difficulty assessment or a statement of special educational needs will not be affected by this change.”
However, Mr Doel said 16 to 18-year-olds were already funded at a rate 22 per cent lower than that for schoolchildren, aged five to 15.
“As a result of the government’s decision to protect the level of funding for the education of five to 15-year-olds, it is England’s 16 to 18-year-olds who continue to lose out despite their education already being funded at a rate lower than pre-16 education,” he said.
“The latest announcement from the DfE means that 18-year-olds will be funded at an even lower rate.
“Young people who have struggled to reach the expected level by the age of 18, and therefore need to stay in education a year longer, will see their funding cut.
“By definition these are the students who need extra help, not less. I have already raised my concerns personally with Education Minister David Laws and will continue to do so.”
The case of Newham College’s dance and drama head Dr Mark Walcott is a difficult one for the FE sector. He was suspended after an apparently homophobic and racist rant. The situation also led to principal Denise Brown-Sackey taking a leave of absence. Dr Jean Kelly looks at the lessons to be learned.
Many have expressed their shock that a lecturer in one of London’s leading colleges is no longer in post after allegedly expressing views that, in the college’s own words, do not reflect the values of the institution.
Though fortunately rare, situations such as this do though prompt some uncomfortable considerations for the teaching profession and indeed the wider sector.
As the sector’s professional body, the Institute for Learning (IfL) is charged, by members, with upholding and promoting the values of a highly regarded and respected teaching and training profession.
Our members sign up to a code of professional practice as a way of demonstrating their commitment to professional integrity, respect for learners and colleagues, and adherence to a professional standard of behaviour.
Teachers and trainers live out this commitment in their everyday practice with learners, as a condition of employment and through codes of conduct set out by subject and vocational professional associations.
In these kinds of discussion, it is helpful to draw parallels with other professions.
In nursing, for example, serious allegations made against an individual would trigger a process that might involve being summoned to a professional conduct hearing by the professional body.
If found to be in breach, the individual could face a penalty, perhaps even being struck off the professional register, in which case it would be impossible for them to continue practising as a nurse.
This kind of process is commonplace in many professions, to instil trust and provide a contract of sorts to guarantee consistent high standards for the public.
Schoolteachers are held to account in a similar way by the National College for Teaching and Leadership, which has powers to prohibit an individual proven to have committed serious misconduct from teaching in schools.
Early years practitioners are now also accountable against professional standards.
Such a system existed in our sector for five years after the government introduced regulations requiring teachers and trainers to register with the IfL.
Lord Lingfield’s first review indicated that government should take responsibility for such extreme cases, but his second concluded that, “establishing special national arrangements to disbar FE lecturers would be disproportionate”
Subsequent revocation of the regulations means that should the individual in this South London college be dismissed, following a new inquiry, they can readily apply for and take up a teaching role elsewhere.
It will be up to them whether or not they disclose particular aspects of their employment history in their application.
We consider that it is in the public interest as well as in the interest of the teaching profession to have accessible and robust arrangements whereby learners, staff and members of the public can report concerns about unprofessional conduct, in the knowledge that their concerns will be treated with the utmost confidentiality, sensitivity and urgency.
Potential breaches must be investigated independently and if a person is found to be seriously in breach, it must be possible to prevent them from teaching again.
At a time when part-time and sessional employment is becoming more commonplace in teaching and training in our sector, colleges and training providers have a fundamental duty to their learners to ensure that the staff they recruit have undergone a rigorous and proper recruitment process for all provision.
The IfL has every confidence that colleges and training providers take this duty incredibly seriously.
This does not, however, offer any national protection for the sector’s employers or for its young, and adult learners, many of whom are vulnerable. Doctors, social workers, schoolteachers and those in other highly respected professions are bound by professional codes, but not teachers in FE.
We regret the government’s decision to remove regulations and fear that a laissez-faire approach for FE brings unacceptable risks for reputation, for learners and employers, for colleges and providers, and for the public.
Dr Jean Kelly, director of professional development, Institute for Learning
Apprenticeship funding will be redirected from providers to employers — but they will have to make a “significant” cash contribution towards training costs for the first time.
Chancellor George Osborne announced in his Autumn Statement a new funding model would use Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) systems to route funding directly to employers.
The Treasury subsequently announced it would launch a consultation on the technical details of the system early next year.
A compulsory employer cash contribution for a significant proportion of apprentices’ external training costs, excluding English and maths, will also be introduced.
Mr Osborne told the House of Commons: “The government will put business at the centre of the apprenticeship system by enabling employers to receive funding for the training costs of apprentices directly through an HMRC-led system and ensuring that employers contribute.”
A Department for Business, Innovation and Skills spokesperson confirmed taxation was one of the HMRC systems being considered to route apprenticeship funding directly to employers.
The government will also be looking at the option of an “alternative funding route for the smallest businesses”.
The Autumn Statement also talked of an “additional contribution” to the costs of training for 16 to 17-year-olds and consider the approach for 18-year-olds, but did not commit to fully-funding them as now.
The Treasury further announced it would make £40m of new funding available to help deliver an additional 20,000 higher apprenticeships starts in the 2013/14 and 2014/15 academic years.
Phil Orford, chief executive of The Forum of Private Business, welcomed the changes which he said would make providers “deliver the skills employers require”.
However, the announcements drew a strong warning from the chief executive of City & Guilds, Chris Jones, told FE Week: “Although it isn’t the intention, the Autumn Statement puts the apprenticeship system at risk.
“All employers, regardless of size, will feel the effects. The reforms will require additional resource. There will be even more hoops to jump through to establish an apprenticeship. Where is the incentive there?”
Stewart Segal, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said: “Mandatory contributions will be a barrier to the growth of the programme for those aged over 19, especially young people who are unemployed.”
Andrew Jones MP is a little uncertain about being profiled when we meet in the glass-roofed atrium of Portcullis House, across the road from the Houses of Parliament.
“I don’t normally do this sort of thing. I normally talk about policies, not personalities,” he says.
Inset: Andrew Jones learning about wildlife in his
constituency from Yorkshire Wildlife Trust photographer Carl Watts
But he is happy to talk about his passion for cricket, which he says he has loved “from the very beginning”.
“Never any good at playing it, mind you, but I do occasionally play and occasionally umpire, but I’m a very enthusiastic spectator,” he says.
“I’ve travelled to lots of places, I should think 60 countries … a bit of a theme has been to go and watch England play cricket.”
But his traveling hasn’t always been connected to cricket.
At 19, Jones drove from coast to coast across America, “zig-zagging” his way from north east to south west on his own.
“It was great fun. I just set off, by myself, thinking: ‘Let’s see what happens’,” he says with a grin.
The standout moment of the trip he says, was his first glimpse of the Pacific Ocean in San Diego-California — a long way from his birthplace in Ilkley, near Bradford in Yorkshire.
I wanted to be in business, I wanted to be in the cut and thrust of that
“I travelled all the way from Ilkley to Leeds for university, which is a whole 15 miles and suddenly I’d embarked on a 4,000-mile journey,” the committed “Yorkie” says, still wide-eyed at the memory.
Jones worked in a seafood restaurant in Boston, Massachusetts, during his university summer holidays.
“It was fun, there was a buzz about it — I’d never been anywhere near America before and I thought: ‘Right, I’m enjoying this…I’ll go and see more of this place’. So I did. I saw lots and it was stunning.”
The 50-year-old is less clear about the moment he decided he wanted to be an MP.
“There was no ‘road to Damascus’ conversion,” he says.
“Certainly, after 1997, and the defeat of the Conservative Party, I thought: ‘Right, this is not acceptable – I’m going try to get more involved in stuff,’ but at no point up until that time had I thought about representative politics at all.
“So at some stage between 1997 and 1999 was the tipping point where interest became picking up the phone and trying to do something about it.”
Politics certainly wasn’t his first ambition.
“Some people do wake up at the age of 15 and think they want to be MPs, fair enough,” he says.
“I wanted to be in business, I wanted to be in the cut and thrust of that.
He says he was attracted to the “fast-moving” nature of business.
“Also, if you were brought up in my time, it was at a time of relentless commercial bad headlines, of Britain on the slide, Britain not recoverable, strikes, three-day weeks, petrol rationing…,” he says.
“I can remember power cuts and job losses… So there was a little bit of a feeling that: ‘Business needs to perform better, I like business, that’s what I’m going to do’.”
Jones’ father, Richard, worked in marketing for the textile company Lister, whose mill towered over Bradford.
“It was quite fun, going in to see the business,” says Jones.
“You would see things like looms, weaving … it’s quite exciting to see if you’re going in as a small boy.”
Jones says the upbringing he looks back on was “a happy childhood where opportunities are open to you”.
His mother, Jean, worked in a bookshop, in between caring for Jones and his brother, , who also went into business.
“It’s inevitable that your upbringing has an impact on you,” he says.
“My father worked in marketing, but I didn’t set off into marketing thinking: ‘I’ll do what my father did’, but I did.
“So if there was an impact, then it wasn’t a conscious one.”
Jones enjoyed school, and went on to study A-levels and English literature at Leeds University (where he got a “very sociable” third class degree) before going on to work for in marketing for B&Q.
“I really enjoyed it and it was a fantastic learning experience for me because it was a time of huge expansion of the business, it was very entrepreneurial, very successful,” he says.
Jones worked in a range of marketing roles for different companies, until, while working for Leeds-based retail consultancy The Marketing Store, he found himself redundant.
“It’s not a particularly pleasant experience, but it was an interesting time because I went to work with some friends starting a business called Savvy Marketing, which is still going strong,” he says, cheerfully.
“It’s a bit of a shock when these things happen, but it’s something which happens a lot and can happen more than once in a career. So the question is how you respond to it really.”
After 1997, he was drawn into grassroots and community politics and eventually to the idea of standing for election.
He was elected as a councillor for High Harrogate in 2003, and became Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources.
But Parliament still beckoned, and in 2010 he was elected MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough.
“It’s quite a shock actually, if we’re being honest about it,” he says of his election victory, where he overturned a 10,500 Liberal Democrat majority.
“I actually did go home and write a losing speech before writing a winning speech after polling day, because I thought it was going to be close but I wasn’t quite sure.
“I had been very focused on the finish line of election day itself, rather than what happened next.
“When you are standing on the platform and the results are announced, it feels slightly surreal, but as you get off the platform the returning officer gives you an envelope, which is an envelope they will give to each winning MP, and it’s basically, ‘Dear member of Parliament’ — it’s the first time I had ever been called that — ‘here are your joining instructions, please report to Portcullis House on Monday, for the start of your induction course’.
Although he can see connections between his career in business, and his new one in politics, Jones admits he’s slightly surprised by the way life turned out.
“If you’d gone to Andrew Jones in 1985 as a marketing employee at B&Q and said: ‘You’ll be a Member of Parliament in 25 years’ time’ I’d have thought you’d got the wrong Andrew Jones,” he says.
But it was his love of the business world, he says, which has brought him into the role of apprenticeship ambassador.
“Skills are a huge part of turning our economy around … and apprenticeships are very much a part of that,” explains Jones.
“I think this is something which has got broad support across the political divide… colleagues love hearing about apprenticeships and meeting apprentices in their area, and quite frankly who, as a Member of Parliament, wouldn’t want to go out and visit successful businesses and meet people learning for the future, investing in skills — who wouldn’t get behind that?”
Wisden Cricketers’ Almanac — if I was stranded on a desert island I would want it sent in every year
What do you do to switch off from work?
You’re never quite off-duty as an MP, but one of the real benefits of being a Yorkie, particularly where I’m from, is that we have fantastic scenery. I go for walks on the Dales or on the moors
What’s your pet hate?
Cynicism about community work or about public service
What did you want to be when you grew up?
Not an MP — I wanted to be in business
If you could invite anyone to a dinner party, living or dead, who would it be?
Winston Churchill, Benjamin Franklin, 19th Century cricket player WG Grace and Elizabeth I
