Colleges should report concerns about a student carrying a weapon and make sure they review internet filtering system effectiveness at least once a year, draft new safeguarding guidance states.
While the draft guidance includes a new section on young people questioning their gender which says colleges should take a “very careful approach” to social transition, it also includes other important new proposals for colleges.
Here’s everything colleges need to know…
1. ‘Very careful’ approach to social transition
The draft guidance contains a new section on supporting children questioning their gender following the landmark Cass review.
The guidance states schools and colleges should not initiate any action and take a “very careful approach in relation to social transition, with parents involved in the “vast majority” of cases.
Draft guidance also makes it clear that there should be “no exceptions” for single sex facilities in colleges, including toilets and changing rooms, but that colleges should “take time to sensitively explain” this to young people who are socially transitioning.
Draft guidance states staff should report concerns about a student carrying a weapon, using a weapon or expressing intent to use one to the dedicated safeguarding lead (DSL).
The DSL should then assess the risk and take “appropriate action”, including any action to de-escalate peer conflict.
It also reiterates old guidance that states all staff should be aware of indicators of a child involved in serious violence, with risks higher for children with disrupted education.
“Early, evidence-based support for those considered at risk, as well as in ‘teachable moments’ when issues emerge is vital. This includes access to trusted adults, social and emotional skill support, and, where available, targeted interventions such as mentoring or therapeutic support.”
3. Mental health as a safeguarding concern
New draft guidance makes it clear that mental health problems “in some cases can develop into safeguarding concerns”, including self-harm or risk of suicide.
The previous guidance stated staff should be aware that mental heath problems can indicate a child has suffered or is at risk of suffering abuse, neglect or exploitation. Only medical professionals should diagnose a child, it added.
4. Clearer guidance on filtering
The proposed guidance says that colleges should “regularly review the effectiveness” of filtering and monitoring systems on college devices at least once every academic year.
Previously, guidance said colleges had to monitor the effectiveness of its systems but did not give a timeframe.
5. ‘Deepfakes’ are child-on-child abuse
The draft guidance contains updated categories of child-on-child abuse to reflect technological advances.
This includes “consensual and non-consensual sharing of self-generated intimate images and/or videos including those generated using AI e.g. deepfakes”.
It added misogyny is a form of harmful sexual behaviour, as well as sexual violence and harassment.
It also explicitly states that upskirting is a criminal offence to reflect the law changes.
6. New domestic abuse reporting duty
The draft guidance also includes new details on ‘operation encompass’, the statutory duty for police to notify a child’s school or college if they believe a child may be a victim of domestic abuse.
It states police should share the child’s name and details, their relationship to the victim or perpetrator, a police reference number, details of the incident and “the voice of the child, such as what they are saying and how they are behaving”.
The draft guidance also states colleges must comply with data protection laws during the operation encompass process, which involves sensitive information.
An ex-trainee lecturer must pay £19,000 towards her union’s costs after a judge ruled she pursued discrimination claims with “no reasonable prospect” of success.
Chido Muswere lost claims of direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation against the University and College Union (UCU) last year following her dismissal from a teaching role at Burnley College in 2022.
Employment tribunals rarely award costs. UCU’s legal bill exceeded £56,000, but the judge capped the award at £20,000. Muswere was instructed to pay £19,000 in a costs order published last week.
UCU applied for costs against Muswere on two grounds; that Muswere’s conduct was “unreasonable” during proceedings and that her claim had “no reasonable prospect of success”.
The tribunal heard Muswere was warned between 2024 and 2025 that her allegations against the UCU were unsupported by evidence.
“She simply would not countenance the possibility that she had not been discriminated against, irrespective of the evidence (or lack of it),” the judge said.
The judge acknowledged the cost order would represent a “substantial debt burden”, but concluded Muswere had the earning capacity to pay it over time.
Muswere told FE Week she believed the tribunal had “mischaracterised” her actions and confirmed she intended to seek a reconsideration of the costs order. She is also appealing the earlier ruling that dismissed her discrimination claims.
“At the minute, I’m not planning on paying anything because I’m not really sure what I’m paying for,” she said.
The 29-year-old added her litigation over the past several years had impacted her financially, but she was prepared to pursue further appeals.
Muswere, a black British woman, was dismissed seven months into a 12-month probationary period while training to teach business studies at Burnley College in 2021.
She alleged her dismissal was racially motivated and cited concerns including teaching observations, disciplinary processes and the handling of CCTV footage.
All claims against the college were dismissed. The tribunal accepted the college’s evidence that her dismissal related to performance concerns and misconduct.
After seeking advice from the UCU following her dismissal in March 2022, Muswere brought separate claims against the union, alleging its representatives had failed to properly challenge the college’s actions and had “diminished” discriminatory treatment.
Those claims were also dismissed. The tribunal found UCU officials had acted in good faith.
The UCU declined to comment on active legal proceedings.
When I was at school, I was told not to do an apprenticeship.
But at 15, I managed to secure work experience with an exceptional employer, an opportunity that very few young people get.
That work experience at engineering consultancy Arupchanged my life. It opened my mind to a world of opportunity and all of a sudden, I knew taking an apprenticeship with them was the route for me.
It didn’t come without challenges, both from peers and teachers, who questioned my choices and wondered if I was jeopardising my education. But I knew better, and undertaking a level 3 apprenticeship aged 16at Arup was the best decision I could have made.
I’m now a fully qualified data scientist at the firm, having completed my level 6 digital and technology solutions professional degree apprenticeship, and I was lucky enough to start my level 7 apprenticeship before they were defunded.
Our survey said
As the voice lead for the Association of Apprentices (AoA), I am delighted to share the responses from over 4,500 apprentices across the UK who took part in the Big Apprentice Survey Report 2026.
Seeing the data come together was eye-opening because behind every statistic is someone trying to build a future through an apprenticeship.
There is a lot to be positive about. Many apprentices report improved confidence, practical skills and a clearer sense of direction.
A quarter of apprentices tell us they would not be in their industries without the apprenticeship route, myself included, and this increases to over a third if those apprentices were entitled to free school meals. However, the data in the survey also shows that experiences are not equal.
Apprentices who received free school meals are more likely to report suffering financial pressure and higher stress. Apprentices who report having a disability are significantly more likely to experience stress and anxiety.
These differences are not about ability or potential. They often come down to the support surrounding an apprentice and how well employers and providers understand individual needs.
I’ve been fortunate to have strong support from my employer. Not everyone gets that.
The survey shows that where apprentices feel well supported by managers and mentors, they are more likely to progress, gain pay increases and feel stable in their roles. Support isn’t just a “nice to have” – it really does change lives.
One finding really stayed with me: over 80 per cent of apprentices don’t feel confident that their views are heard by government.
Apprentices live this system every day. We know how off-the-job training fits into real workloads. We know where communication works and where it doesn’t. We understand the pressures of balancing work, study and life. That perspective should be part of the evolution of government policy.
Cost-of-living pressures have overtaken all other stressors
Being involved with AoA has shown me how powerful it is when apprentices have a platform and a voice.
AoA is free for apprentices to join, which matters because cost should never be a barrier to receiving support and accessing a community.
Through AoA, apprentices connect with others, share experiences and gain recognition for what they achieve. Sometimes just knowing you’re not the only one facing a challenge can make a huge difference.
The results weren’t just about numbers; they were about highlighting where apprentices are thriving and where change could help level the playing field.
Compared with last year’s survey, which gathered just over 2,000 responses, this year’s 4,500 respondents show a clear shift: stress related to work-life balance has risen, cost-of-living pressures have overtaken all other stressors, and career progression has now surpassed work experience as the most valued aspect of an apprenticeship.
Apprenticeships have huge potential. They can open doors for people with different learning styles, backgrounds and starting points. My own journey shows that.
But if we want apprenticeships to work for everyone, the views of apprentices cannot be an afterthought.
Listening to apprentices isn’t about criticism, it’s about improvement. It’s how we build a system that works in the real world, not just on paper.
Behind every data point is a person trying to build their future.
Leadership and management apprenticeships are on the chopping block under plans to find savings and tilt the apprenticeship system towards young people, Jacqui Smith has confirmed.
The skills minister told FE Week the popular programmes, along with other unnamed “higher level” standards, are “not only not what people would traditionally think of as apprenticeships, but also things that people traditionally have thought of as employers funding [themselves]”.
“So yes, that will be one of the areas,” she confirmed when asked whether leadership and management apprenticeships were up for defunding consideration.
Smith added the government would have “more to say about which of those apprenticeship standards we think aren’t appropriate for public funding” but did not commit to a timeframe or scale of impact.
Leaders have warned that removing public funding from leadership and management apprenticeships would be a “disorientating shock” for many employers who have “never been told that levy funding is not theirs to use as they see fit”.
Value for money
Employer anxiety has grown over potential cuts to management courses and industry progression routes amid mounting apprenticeship budget pressure in recent months.
A “streamlining” review was signalled by chancellor Rachel Reeves in November’s budget, when she reiterated that the government would refocus apprenticeships on young people and simplify the system to ensure better value for money.
Ministers are concerned about spiralling numbers of expensive higher-level apprenticeships being taken up by older workers, while starts at lower levels and among young people have crashed.
Apprenticeship starts at level 2 have plummeted almost 60 per cent from 161,390 in 2017-18, the year the apprenticeship levy was introduced, to 65,680 in 2024-25, while starts at level 3 shrunk 12 per cent from 166,220 to 147,090 over the same period.
Meanwhile, starts at level 4 and above, which are more costly to deliver, rocketed 192 per cent from 48,150 to 140,730.
FE Week understands that officials are scrutinising apprenticeships that resemble continuing professional development instead of discrete occupations, and are mostly taken by older workers.
Management standards are the most popular in terms of starts across most apprenticeship levels.
FE Week analysis of the government’s latest full-year data shows that at level 5, the operations manager apprenticeship recorded the most enrolments in each of the past three years, hitting triple the number of starts as the next most popular (leader in adult care) in 2024-25.
The chartered manager degree apprenticeship was the most popular at level 6, the senior leader programme was the most prolific at level 7, and at level 3 the team leader standard was consistently the second most popular.
Most starts on these standards are from people aged 25 and older.
The total number of people aged 24 or younger starting an apprenticeship fell by 22 per cent, from 220,280 in 2017-18 to 172,240 in 2024-25.
Starts for people aged 25 and older have shot up by 17 per cent from 155,480 to 181,270 over the same period.
During an interview withThe Times last month, former Labour cabinet minister Alan Milburn, who is leading a review into the rise in young people who are not in education, employment or training (NEET), said it was a “crazy” fact that a significant number of them go to people over the age of 40.
“Ask any member of the public what they think an apprenticeship is,” Milburn said. “It’s an entry opportunity for young people, not in-work training for older people.
“So we’ve got to look at all of these things and we’ve got to look at where we’re spending public money.”
Traditionally speaking
The government has already moved level 7 apprenticeships out of public funding for people aged 22 and older.
FE Week asked skills minister Jacqui Smith what else was in the firing line in terms of the government’s streamlining efforts during an interview for National Apprenticeship Week at a site visit to Kier Group (pictured above) this week.
She said officials were looking “very carefully at areas that don’t have many starts” before confirming that management apprenticeships were under real threat of defunding.
“We’re working with employers, and we’ll have more to say about which of those apprenticeship standards we think aren’t appropriate for, essentially, public funding,” she said.
Asked directly whether she was referring to management apprenticeships, the minister replied: “I think there are elements in some of the higher-level apprenticeships, some of the areas of leadership and management, where not only are these not what people would traditionally think of as apprenticeships, but there are also things that people traditionally have thought of as employers funding [themselves]. So yes, that will be one of the areas.”
While the government is engaged in a streamlining effort, officials are also set to bring on board new short courses to be funded through the levy from April. Smith told FE Week, however, that the initial offer would be “tight” (click here to read full story).
That’s Asda price
Defunding of popular management apprenticeships is expected to cause outrage among employers.
The Chartered Management Institute (CMI) launched a petition last month to show the removal of management apprenticeships would undermine productivity in industrial strategy sectors, as well as other critical areas such as retail and hospitality.
It has around 5,000 signatures so far, including testimonies from big-name employers such as Amazon, BAE Systems, Heathrow, Barnardo’s, John Lewis, Kier Group, Lloyds Bank and Marie Curie.
James Goodman, supermarket giant Asda’s chief people officer, said: “Reports that the government plan to defund leadership apprenticeships would clearly be a further backward step, that would cut off proven progression routes and weaken the sector’s ability to develop future leaders.”
Matthew Percival, future of work and skills director at the CBI, said businesses were “deeply disappointed that ‘how can we unlock business investment in skills’ has been replaced with ‘where is the least damaging place to cut’”.
“With each new announcement, the levy looks more like a tax and less like a ‘use it or lose it’ incentive to invest in training,” he added.
Every little helps
The levy is generating more cash contributions than expected and is estimated to raise £4.4 billion this financial year.
England’s apprenticeship budget for 2025-26 has received an in-year top-up worth £43.2 million, bringing it up to a record £3.118 billion. Deducting the £500 million paid to the devolved nations, it means the top slice the Treasury takes between how much the levy generates and how much is dished out for apprenticeship spending hits around £780 million.
Percival said: “It [the levy] takes more money out of employers’ training budgets than it adds to government-directed programmes, reducing total investment in training. Turning this around starts with transparency about where levy receipts go, not only how the skills budget for England is spent.”
Ben Rowland, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, added: “Removing public funding from leadership and management apprenticeships would be a disorientating shock for many employers who have never been told that levy funding is not theirs to use as they see fit.
“Not only are these skills vital for productivity and growth, they are vital if these employers are going to be in a position to take on NEETs into their workforces. Government has to pause and rethink these proposals from a whole system perspective.”
Sources told FE Week that government officials could link the streamlining efforts to new apprenticeship units, in some cases turning full apprenticeships into fundable shorter courses.
The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) said the threat of restrictions to management apprenticeships was “damaging business confidence and would be counterproductive to growth”.
“It is vital that apprenticeship units deliver the promised flexibility and help to address the training gaps created by the removal of level 7 provision or defunding of management and leadership training at any level,” a BCC spokesperson said.
Employers will face no cap on the amount of levy funding they can spend on new apprenticeship units when an initial “tight group” launches in April, skills minister Jacqui Smith has said.
FE Week understands as few as eight short courses will initially be fundable through the reformed growth and skills levy from the new financial year – with seven in engineering and construction and one in AI.
News of the limited first wave comes just weeks before the government’s rollout date, with no detailed announcement yet published on the units’ content, duration, funding bands or assessment arrangements.
Damp squib
Last year, the Labour government confirmed it would introduce new short courses, dubbed ‘apprenticeship units’, from April in priority sectors aligned to the industrial strategy.
FE Week understands the initial batch will focus on areas such as heat pump installation, EV charging point installation, solar panel installation and welding, with another on AI for business leaders.
Ministers have indicated further units will follow after April.
Asked by FE Week this week why no details had yet been published, Smith said: “They have been in development, and we will launch a quite tight group of apprenticeship units in April.
“We will make more announcements about exactly what it is [that] will be developed as apprenticeship units, or will be delivered as apprenticeship units post-April.”
Unlimited power?
In 2022, while in opposition, Labour committed to widening the apprenticeship levy so employers could spend up to 50 per cent of their contributions on non-apprenticeship training.
But the threshold was missing from the party’s election manifesto and ministers have moved away from the 50 per cent figure and refused to confirm a cap since entering government.
Smith confirmed no fixed limit had been set when asked what proportion of levy contributions employers could spend on the new apprenticeship units from April.
“It is important that there is this flexibility as well as new foundation apprenticeships and shorter duration apprenticeships,” she said. “The ongoing development of apprenticeship units that can be part of that.
“We have not set a specific contribution precisely because what we’re interested in is the flexibility that enables employers to use what they need in order to develop their workforce.
“So, looking at what we are doing, both the tilt to young people, which we’ve been very clear that we will use policy to achieve, and also delivery against the industrial strategy.”
Pressed on whether this effectively meant employers will have an unlimited use of levy funds for non-apprenticeship training, Smith replied: “Well, I didn’t say it was unlimited. I said there isn’t a set percentage of flexibility.
“There isn’t going to be an overall level of the apprenticeship levy that is used on flexibility, but we’ve gone much further than the plans in opposition, in terms of how we can flex the levy, and we’re continuing to talk to employers.
“We’re continuing to use Skills England to identify where the flexibility is needed, where we need short courses, where we need to update apprenticeships, where we need to develop new areas of skills and apprenticeships.”
‘Paltry’ offer compared to Labour’s commitment
Stephen Evans, chief executive of Learning and Work Institute, said the limited number of units would disappoint employers.
“We think employers should have broader flexibility to spend part of their levy on training that isn’t apprenticeships, so a total of just eight units almost all in construction or engineering wouldn’t be enough and would likely seem quite paltry to a lot of employers compared to Labour’s promise of up to 50 per cent flex for all employers.”
He added any flexibility “should have a cap so the primary focus is on apprenticeships”, and flagged an L&W blueprint for a “flex and match” levy that argued employers which invest more in youth apprenticeships should get greater flexibility.
Hannah Larsen, policy officer at the British Chambers of Commerce, said setting no limit for the flexibility would simplify the system, but warned the initial offer was too restricted.
“If funding for apprenticeship units is not limited then it will provide a level playing field for businesses on flexibility and make the system easier to administer.
“But it is disappointing that just eight apprenticeship units are being offered, especially considering the likely defunding of management and higher-level apprenticeships.
“While it makes sense to start with areas facing dire skills shortages, there are many other sectors where firms need to upskill people quickly.
“Hopefully, further apprenticeship units will quickly be rolled out so that more businesses and employees can benefit.”
The Department for Work and Pensions said it would provide further information “in due course”.
Colleges have been told to take a “very careful approach” to social transition requests from gender-questioning students under long-awaited new government guidance.
The Department for Education (DfE) is consulting on draft guidance on supporting children and young people aged under 18 who are questioning their gender, which, if signed off, would become part of the statutory keeping children safe in education (KCSIE) guidance.
College leaders have urged the sector to respond to the consultation so the final guidance “recognises that children of different ages face different types of risks” and “have greater personal agency”.
It comes after the landmark Cass Review of gender care services for under-18s, which found “remarkably weak” evidence around medical interventions in gender care, with a lack of research available.
Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said the proposed guidance should “give teachers the clarity they need to ensure the safeguarding and wellbeing of gender questioning children and young people”.
‘Very careful’ approach
The guidance states colleges should take a “very careful approach in relation to social transition”.
“The Cass Review acknowledged that there is a lack of good evidence on the long-term impact of social transition on young people, but it is clear that social transition should be viewed as an active intervention that may have significant effects on the child or young person in terms of their psychological functioning and longer-term outcomes.”
The guidance states that parents should be involved in the “vast majority” of cases in which a young person questions their gender. However in cases where involving parents or carers “would constitute a greater risk than not involving them,” college designated safeguarding leads (DSL) get to decide next steps.
What is in the best interests of the child may be different to the child’s wishes, the draft guidance adds.
The guidance uses “child” throughout to describe under 18s.
Polly Harrow, DfE’s further education student support champion and vice principal at Kirklees College, said the guidance “will be welcomed by the FE sector”.
She added: “The guidance is useful for all educators and gives clear information and advice on an issue that needs clarity and sensitivity.”
Colleges “should not initiate any action regarding social transition”, and the guidance only applies where a young person or their parent has made a request, it states.
The first step for colleges is to consider what is in the best interests of the child and other children.
“Schools and colleges should consider everything that could be affecting a child, including whether they have any wider health issues or neurodiversity,” the draft guidance states.
‘No exceptions’ for single-sex facilities
The draft guidance said there are “no exceptions” for single sex facilities in colleges, including toilets and changing rooms.
It states colleges should “take time to sensitively explain” that supporting social transition “will not include allowing access to toilets, changing rooms or boarding or residential accommodation designated for the opposite sex”.
Young people undergoing social transition will not be allowed to join PE classes for the opposite sex where there are safety reasons for single-sex classes, the draft guidance adds.
But colleges have some flexibility over the use of children’s names.
The draft guidance states “supporting social transition might consider discussing options with pupils and staff, such as using names instead of pronouns”.
David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said the guidance “may need to go further in acknowledging that older children, including college students, often have personal agency and different relationships with their families.
“The college sector will respond to the consultation in detail, and we hope that this will lead to a better document that will help staff to support and safeguard all their students.”
‘Pragmatic support for teachers’
Phillipson said the draft guidance will “give teachers the clarity they need to ensure the safeguarding and wellbeing of gender questioning children and young people.
“This is about pragmatic support for teachers, reassurance for parents, and above all, the safety and wellbeing of children and young people.”
It has also been backed by Dr Hilary Cass, who led the government review into gender care services for under-18s in 2024.
“The updated guidance is practical and reflects the recommendations of my review, giving schools much-needed clarity on their legal duties so they can support children with confidence,” Cass said.
England’s apprenticeship budget was topped up with an extra £43.2 million halfway through this financial year, underscoring mounting financial pressures and intensifying the government’s drive to tighten control of the system.
Treasury documents published as “supplementary estimates” show the 2025-26 apprenticeship budget increased from £3.075 billion to £3.118 billion.
While the £43 million represents just a 1.4 per cent uplift, the mid-year adjustment reinforces warnings that the system is operating on increasingly fine margins. It follows the first-ever overspend of England’s apprenticeship budget in 2024-25.
As FE Week previously revealed, employer anxiety is growing over potential cuts to popular management training routes and progression pathways as ministers scramble to contain costs.
Level 7 apprenticeships have already been defunded for learners aged 22 and over from January. Further hard choices are expected, particularly as ministers expand levy flexibility to fund shorter courses under the rebadged growth and skills levy from April.
Imran Tahir, senior research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the government faces “a delicate balancing act” to keep the apprenticeship budget under control.
“In 2024-25 it was overspent for the first time, and it looks like the coming years will be challenging,” he told FE Week.
“The government has taken steps to rein in spending – most notably by restricting higher-level apprenticeships, which tend to be longer and more expensive. However, at the same time, ministers have broadened what levy funding can be used for as part of the growth and skills levy, which is likely to increase demand on the budget.
“Where the budget ultimately settles will matter, as further overspends would either require additional cash or force savings elsewhere.”
Treasury continues to retain sizeable share
The total volume of apprenticeship starts has remained static for the past four years, but the increased budget pressure has been caused by soaring numbers of higher-level apprenticeships that are more expensive to deliver than lower-level programmes.
The apprenticeship levy is forecast to generate £4.4 billion from employer contributions this financial year.
After around £500 million is distributed annually to the devolved nations, and with England’s revised 2025-26 apprenticeship budget now standing at £3.118 billion, the Treasury is effectively retaining an estimated £780 million difference between levy receipts and apprenticeship spending.
The government has refused to share what the total apprenticeship budget for 2026-27 has been set at.
Stephen Evans, chief executive of the Learning and Work Institute, said this year’s increase in the budget for England broadly tracks rising levy revenues but does not fundamentally change the wider picture.
“It’s good that the apprenticeship budget is increasing, though this is broadly in line with growth in the amount the levy raises; the Treasury is still keeping over £700 million of levy funds above what it spends,” he said.
Evans added that recent policy decisions – including limiting level 7 funding to younger learners and scrapping the 10 per cent top-up for levy payers – will reduce the risk of another overspend. But he warned this fiscal move alone would not reverse the decline in opportunities for young people at intermediate level.
“For that we need a growing economy, to limit the rising costs employers are facing, make it easier and provide more support to take on apprentices, and increase the incentives for employers to do this,” he said.
“Otherwise we risk a steady-as-she-goes approach focused on sticking to a budget rather than going for the growth that’s desperately needed when almost one million young people are NEET.”
November’s budget saw the chancellor announce an extra £725 million over the three remaining years of this Parliament to be injected into the apprenticeship system, but £140 million of this will be going to mayors to help connect NEETs to local employers.
Some of the additional cash will also go towards fully funding apprenticeships for under-25s in small and medium-sized businesses.
NIC relief bill surges
Separate Treasury figures show relief on employer national insurance contributions (NICs) for apprentices under 25 is projected to rise sharply – from £370 million in 2024-25 to £570 million in 2025-26.
Experts said they would be surprised if the foregone employer NICs subsidies for under-25 apprentices were counted against the apprenticeship budget as they are sufficiently distinct policy levers.
A Student Loans Company board member has been appointed its next chair.
Gary Page, who has served on the board of the SLC since 2020, will step up to the chair role on April 1. He succeeds Peter Lauener, who is about to complete his second and final three-year term as chair.
It comes as the government-owned body plans to modernise its systems ahead of post 18 education funding reforms, such as preparing to open applications for lifelong loan entitlement (LLE) funding for the first time this September.
Alongside his role on the SLC board, Page chairs Triodos Bank UK, is a lay member of the South East Employment Tribunal and is a trustee of the charity Hope After Suicide Loss UK.
The SLC paid out nearly £24 billion in further and higher education student finance UK-wide in 2023-24 and employs nearly 3,300 people. It’s one of Whitehall’s largest arms-length bodies, processing more than a million applications for student loans and grants per year and working with HMRC to collect repayments.
As chair, Page will be responsible for leading the board of six non-executive directors in holding senior managers to account over operational and financial performance. He is appointed by the ‘shareholders’ of the SLC, who are the education secretary and representatives of the devolved nations.
Education secretary Bridget Phillipson thanked Lauener for his “dedicated service” and said Page’s leadership experience would be “invaluable”.
Phillipson added: “I am confident he will provide the strong leadership needed to deliver a modern, efficient service for students across the UK, as the organisation undertakes an important transformation project.”
The eight-day per month role attracts remuneration of £59,000 per year.
Page described the timing of his appointment as “pivotal”.
He said: “I have enjoyed being a board member of SLC over the last five years, and it’s such a pivotal moment to be stepping into the role of chair. The organisation is a vital source of financial support in helping customers across the UK pursue their further and higher education ambitions, and I look forward to contributing to its continued success.”
