The 3 top challenges to unlocking prison apprenticeships

Practical issues still remain to be worked through, writes Peter Cox

“One huge benefit that apprenticeships would provide is hope, and sometimes hope is all you need to influence change.”

This moving statement by former prisoner David Breakspear was submitted to the House of Commons education select committee’s inquiry into prison education.

As National Apprenticeship Week comes to an end, it seems that there are, finally, genuine grounds for optimism.

The Ministry of Justice today announced that it will change the law to allow prisoners at open prisons across England to access apprenticeship opportunities while they are still serving time but are out on day release, or nearing the end of their sentence.

Opening up apprenticeships to more prisoners is a positive step in reducing reoffending.

Using education and training to support offenders from prison into employment is a crucial step in giving them the tools they need to transform their lives.

Novus stands ready to play its part. As part of LTE Group, a leading further education college group, it has more than 30 years of experience of delivering education and training in prisons.

In partnership with training provider Total People, also part of LTE, it has launched an innovative “foundation apprenticeships” pilot programme at HMP Hindley in Greater Manchester, mapping level 2 vocational provision to existing apprenticeship standards.

Learners who progress to an apprenticeship after their release will be able to demonstrate some of the knowledge, skills and behaviour required.

This could lead to a two-year apprenticeship being completed in as little as 12 months – fast-tracking the journey from prison to sustainable employment.

We are keen to explore how we can use our strong employer links to make use of the new flexibilities announced by the MoJ.

But if we are to ensure that apprenticeships achieve their full potential, there are three key issues which must be considered.

1. Employment, contracts and ROTL

An apprenticeship must be a real job – but exactly what is and isn’t possible for prisoners is not entirely clear.

Governors can already allow prisoners to be paid by an outside employer – and impose a levy on their earnings, with proceeds going to victim support.

In 2019 the government announced that more prisoners could be eligible for release on temporary licence (ROTL) earlier on in their sentence.

Little progress has been made since then, however, and practical issues remain to be worked through.

ROTL may not be appropriate for some prisoners or in some types of establishments, while learners switching prisons mid-apprenticeship would cause disruption to all parties. Excluding these groups limits the number of prisoners who could benefit.

Another option would be to open up apprenticeships to prisoners carrying out work within prisons.

At HMP Hindley, for instance, Novus runs a general maintenance programme under which prisoners refurbish cells, classrooms and toilets.

This isn’t a simulated environment. If activity could be carried out by a contractor, it could equally be done by an apprentice, provided that contractual requirements are met.

2. Attracting providers and employers

Even outside prison, training providers are understandably cautious in who they enrol. If an apprentice doesn’t progress to completion, the consequences are serious, both in terms of potential funding clawback and achievement rates.

Providers and employers need reassurance that they would not be penalised for situations out of their control, such as a prisoner not being released from their cell due to operational challenges.

And while some employers already recruit offenders, including Novus’ partners such as Greene King, Kier and Willmott Dixon, further incentives could encourage more companies to engage with prison education.

3. Ensuring “through the gate” support

If an apprentice is released part way through an apprenticeship programme, will they be able to complete it? Will they still receive support from the tutors they have come to trust? And who will ensure they are given safe accommodation during their apprenticeship?

All parties must work together to ensure apprentices receive the wraparound support they need. And we must not forget about pay.

A 21-year-old in the first year of an apprenticeship is entitled to a minimum hourly rate of just £4.30. Is this really enough to steer a vulnerable young person away from reoffending?

If prisoner apprenticeships are to be a success, they must be rigorous, respected and sustainable. If this can be achieved, then they could offer the hope that so many prisoners badly need.

Prisoners to finally be offered apprenticeships

Prisoners are to be offered apprenticeships for the first time to help cut crime and reoffending, the government has announced. 

Laws will be changed so that prisoners at open prisons across England are able to apply for apprenticeship opportunities in “vital industries”, such as hospitality and construction.

The scheme will initially be offered to up to a hundred prisoners across England before being rolled out across the wider prison estate.

The question of whether prisoners should be able to access apprenticeships has been long on the government’s agenda and was discussed in a recent prison education hearing.

“We want everyone to have access to the high-quality training they need to progress and build a brighter future,” education secretary Nadhim Zahawi said. 

“Apprenticeships will offer prisoners a life changing chance to gain the skills they need to secure a rewarding career, while providing more businesses with the skilled workforce they need to grow.”

Prisoners are currently able to study, train and work while in jail and a further 5,000 prisoners take part in work in the community through release on temporary licence, where they learn skills and help shore up local labour shortages.

“We are introducing prisoner apprenticeships to give offenders the skills and training they need to secure a job on release,” said justice secretary, Dominic Raab. 

“Getting offenders into work offers them a second chance to lead a more positive life and stay on the straight and narrow. 

“Breaking the cycle of crime is critical to our mission to drive down reoffending, cut crime and protect the public,” he said. 

The government’s decision was welcomed by Simon Ashworth, director of policy at AELP, who recommended giving prisoners access to apprenticeships in an education committee inquiry last year. 

Peter Cox, managing director of prison educatio provider Novus, said: “Opening up apprenticeships to more prisoners is a positive step in reducing reoffending. Using education and training to support offenders from prison into employment is a crucial step in giving them the tools they need to transform their lives.”

Under the scheme hundreds of prisoners will start an apprenticeship by 2025, the Ministry of Justice said, with “pre-apprenticeship training offered to thousands more – preparing them for a full apprenticeship scheme or a higher skilled job on release”.

In an Education Committee enquiry session last month, skills minister Alex Burghart said that there is currently no primary legislative barrier to prisoners becoming apprentices. 

Burghart said this might involve prisoners to go out on day release and take advantage of “existing funding streams”.

At the time, Burghart said that the DfE had only been doing provisional work on the issue and that no formal commitments had been made.

The launch comes in National Apprenticeship Week.

College alarm as study shows ‘elite’ sixth forms recruit from far and wide

“Elite” sixth forms teach few poorer students and recruit heavily from neighbouring areas, according to new analysis that challenges ministers’ levelling-up promises.

The government said new 16-to-19 free schools focused on getting learners into top universities would “transform education” in left-behind areas with “weak” outcomes.

But colleges leaders warn they will damage the viability of their offering while campaigners say they will lead to “selection for a lucky few and rejection for the majority” after a new study found similarities among their intakes with grammar schools.

Dave Thomson, author of the Education Datalab study, said super-selective sixth forms “may well prove popular, but they are hardly likely to recruit many disadvantaged students unless entry requirements are relaxed”.

The analysis, shared exclusively with FE Week, looked at the characteristics of the five per cent of sixth forms with the highest-attaining year 12 pupils, based on their GCSE results.

It found just 60 per cent of students at such schools lived in the same local authority area as where they went to school, compared to 82 per cent of all year 12 pupils.

The research also found just six per cent of pupils attending the most selective sixth forms outside London were disadvantaged, compared to a national average of 17 per cent.

“The one thing missing from most conversations about elite sixth forms is whether we need them and whether they’ll do the things they claim they’ll do,” David Corke, director of education and skills policy at the Association of Colleges, told FE Week.

“The answer to both is probably not… There are already hundreds of brilliant colleges and providers across the country, delivering excellent education and training to millions.”

He said this latest analysis shows that the more selective sixth forms “tend to recruit from further outside of their local areas”.

Corke added that it is known that excessive competition too often leads to poor outcomes and a narrower offer for students.

“The answer to levelling up places isn’t to further fragment the post-16 offer, nor to simply favour a small and elite group. It is to focus attention on the needs and progress of every young person by properly funding every sixth form and college, not just a select few new ones,” he added.

Responding to the Datalab findings, Bill Watkin, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association, said that the population is growing and additional sixth form places are needed in the system if extra young people are to be accommodated.

He argued the government’s post-16 capacity fund is helping existing, high-performing sixth form colleges to expand and the SFCA believes that is the most effective way to meet the increase in student numbers.

“The proposed specialist sixth forms are another way of building capacity, although as they tend to be small and narrowly focused on specific subjects, they are unlikely to represent a solution for more than a tiny number of students,” he said.

“And as this analysis from Education Datalab shows, highly selective sixth forms may not make a huge contribution to the levelling up agenda either, given they tend to recruit fewer disadvantaged students than other institutions.”

Watkin explained the government should make sure any new provision considers existing availability in the community and does not duplicate or displace what is already on offer. 

“It is sometimes a good thing to introduce a disruption to the system, but only when this leads to a constructive and positive outcome,” he said.

Janet Meenaghan, principal of Stamford College in Lincolnshire, told FE Week that in light of the research by Datalab it was “difficult to see how new specialist sixth-form free schools will contribute to the levelling up agenda”.

She said that in Lincolnshire, which is one of the 55 education investment areas set for new “elite” sixth forms, there are a “plethora of highly selective sixth forms” including grammars, 11-to-18 schools, private schools and sixth form colleges.

“But it’s further education colleges that tend to provide A-level choice for disadvantaged learners. And we do this extremely well,” she said.

“Stamford College has built a reputation for the high standard of our teaching, with an A-level pass rate that is always over 99 per cent, excellent student satisfaction rates and a strong record on progression, including to Oxbridge and Russell Group universities. We are an exemplar of levelling up.

“We don’t need more A-level providers. If the government is serious about levelling up, it should invest in FE colleges and redress the funding imbalance resulting from a decade of austerity.”

The OfS is – mostly – correct to say colleges should work closely with schools

The benefits run both ways – but the OfS should not expect colleges to drive school improvement, writes Marion Plant

“Universities and colleges have a moral duty to put their shoulder to the wheel of improving that wider community they sit within, and as both educational and civic institutions, improving attainment in our schools is an essential part of that work.” 

These were the words spoken on Tuesday by the new director for fair access and participation at the Office for Students, John Blake.

I agree strongly with that statement, and I will explain how and why. The more interesting and complicated part is how a college goes about it.  

I am in the slightly unusual position as a college leader because I am also the chief executive of a multi-academy trust.  We have four mainstream secondary schools in the trust.  We also have a sizeable 14-16 provision at the college – alternative provision and home educated.

First of all, I am concerned that the education system is so fragmented that if you are a parent, there is very little clear coherence about the route your child should take through education and ultimately into work.

It is the moral duty, of all those in the system, including those who fund us in government, to create greater coherence in the system.  

So if we are talking about colleges getting involved with schools, it should be all about about building coherent pathways into meaningful work. Closer partnership also allows seamless sharing of information at all stages, particularly for young people with SEND.

Colleges as institutions hugely benefit when they work closely with schools. For example, we have learnt a lot from our schools about best practice in English and maths GCSE. 

We support thousands of young people and adults to re-sit GCSEs in English and maths, but recruiting great teachers is challenging because of pay disparities.  Working together to improve performance before entering college helps close that attainment gap.

At the same time, schools can benefit from many aspects of college life. For a start, schools are usually smaller than colleges and we are able to provide the backing of a multi-million-pound organisation to help reduce back office costs and improve resilience. 

This benefit was clearly felt during the recent lockdowns when vulnerable pupils and key worker children from several local schools attended a ‘”joint provision” at the college’s main campus.

OfS director John Blake

Colleges can also provide a breadth of careers advice and experiences that schools might not have access to otherwise, with recognised qualifications, apprenticeships, supported internships and T Levels.  These are often opportunities that school teachers are less knowledgeable about.

At the same time, schools can themselves provide work experience opportunities for FE students, which is a growing need, given T Level work experience requirements. Schools have digital IT teams, childcare learning opportunities, and so on. 

FE staff can also benefit through continuous development opportunities. We have a SENDCO, for instance, who has worked across the age range of schools and colleges to extend their understanding of learner development across different age groups. 

Colleges can deliver adult education through schools

One important possibility is colleges delivering adult education through schools. This is often missed in conversations about school improvement.

Adult education with parents or carers at a school is a hugely powerful way of improving skills and confidence within local communities and also improving a student’s own attainment.

The question then is: is all this already happening in FE? Does the OfS need to call for this? 

We perhaps do a lot more work with schools than the average college, but we are not unique. Many colleges work closely with schools.

However, leaders and FE staff should recognise that, yes, there is a funding disparity between schools and colleges, but supporting schools has a moral purpose, and a clear business benefit.

I suspect the OfS doesn’t realise how much work some colleges are already doing with schools.  

But we should recognise that the experts in school improvement specifically are school teachers. Where I would urge caution is around any suggestions colleges get involved in intervention in school improvement.

Awarding bodies’ report reveals rocketing cost of regulatory burden

Awarding bodies are forking out more than £6 million a year complying with regulation that has risen “exponentially” over the past decade, according to new research.

Calls are now being made for a more streamlined system which reduces an “overwhelming and complex” regulatory burden – including abandoning a key policy in the skills bill to add the government’s apprenticeship quango to the list of bodies approving technical qualifications.

The findings have been published through a Federation of Awarding Bodies (FAB) report entitled Feel the Weight and shared exclusively with FE Week.

It shows that from 2014 to 2020, the number of regulatory bodies which set their own requirements and sanction regimes that awarding organisations must comply with across the UK grew from two to six.

Through a survey of members, the federation found compliance with these bodies costs an awarding organisation, on average, £4,618 per month and around £6 million as a sector annually. FAB believes “in reality” these figures will be much higher when including awarding bodies outside of their membership who deliver general qualifications.

However, the report does not provide estimates for how much compliance with regulators has changed cost-wise since 2014.

Unsurprisingly, specialist and niche awarding and assessment organisations reported particular challenges dealing with increases in regulatory burden. In some cases, small awarding bodies have chosen to surrender their recognition in some devolved nations.

“The current three country regulatory compliance in general is currently not only complex and high-maintenance but also high-risk, with the sanctions that Ofqual, Qualification Wales and the Council for Curriculum Exams and Assessment Regulation can individually impose, potentially for the same non-compliance,” one unnamed awarding body said in the report.

“There are benefits to regulation, but smaller awarding bodies are likely to find it increasingly difficult to justify, particularly professional and chartered bodies which already have an established reputation in their individual sectors for delivery of professional educational development.”

Reflecting on the findings, FAB chief executive Tom Bewick said: “Our starting point is that regulation is a positive thing for the sector. But equally, we must also monitor carefully the growth in regulatory burden for our members, which can stifle innovation and result in more cost and bloated bureaucracy that hampers progress.”

Ofqual, the main regulator for qualifications in England, said: “Our priority is to regulate on behalf of students of all ages, and apprentices. We look forward to continuing to work with the FAB, their members and other awarding organisations, working together with students as our shared compass.”

In addition, FAB’s report warns the implementation of the skills bill, which is currently making its way through parliament, creates “significantly more confusion” in the landscape for the regulation of qualifications.

One contentious reform is to hand the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education the ultimate sign-off power for the approval and regulation of technical qualifications in future.

Awarding bodies claim this is a retrograde step and would reverse the gains of independent regulation that parliament intended in 2009 when it set up Ofqual.

Unlike Ofqual, the institute is a non-departmental public body directly accountable to ministers, not parliament.

There is concern that IfATE’s new powers would therefore introduce a conflict of interest. Some also fear that having two regulators splitting responsibility for certain types of vocational and technical qualifications could create a muddled and cumbersome two-tier system of regulation.

The DfE said the measures in the bill will create a “single approval gateway for technical qualifications” via the IfATE, while Ofqual will retain its “statutory responsibility for recognising awarding organisations in England across all categories of both academic and technical qualifications”.

Apprenticeship funding band pilot finally gets underway

The proposed new model for deciding apprenticeship funding bands is finally ready to be piloted, the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has announced.

Over the next 12 months the quango will invite trailblazer groups, on a voluntary and small-scale basis, to test the long-awaited process.

The pilot will initially focus on those apprenticeships unable to generate the number of quotes required by the current funding band allocation process, newly developed apprenticeships and those apprenticeships with no or low starts.

Around 20 trailblazer groups from various sectors are set to be piloted, but the IfATE said it was unable to provide a list of those involved.

The institute’s funding band consultation first launched in February 2020 and proposed a controversial new model that could see rates cut by over 40 per cent.

The institute then opened a second consultation on a revised “rates-based variable model” in August, which would essentially provide trailblazers with ready-made quotes. Trailblazers would also be able to provide additional evidence to inform a more bespoke level of funding, based upon the costs of teaching, consumables and mandatory qualifications.

However, concerns were raised that apprenticeships would become unprofitable if current ineligible costs – such as enrolments, inductions and initial assessments – were excluded from the new model.

A third consultation, this time by the Education and Skills Funding Agency, to decide what costs count towards apprenticeship training was then launched in December 2020 and is currently ongoing.

The outcome of the IfATE’s second funding band consultation is being held up by the ESFA’s eligible costs review but the institute is keen to plough ahead with testing its model regardless.

Any changes that are made to the funding rules from the ESFA’s review “will be reflected in the respective calculations of the new model”, an institute spokesperson said.

An IfATE update published last month said a key change made to the model presented during the most recent consultation is to remove the initial rates-based estimate from the proposed new approach.

This means that, in every instance, the trailblazer group will need to provide “specific, defined information” on various aspects of the individual apprenticeship being considered.

The institute said it believes the removal of the initial rates-based estimate of the approach will “strengthen transparency and provide a clearer and simpler process for employers and other stakeholders”.

Simon Ashworth, the director of policy at the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said scrapping fixed inputs “is certainly a step forward” and should “result in proposed funding bands being more reflective of the real cost of delivery for providers”.

An IfATE spokesperson said trailblazer feedback “has been positive, with comments focusing on the improved transparency of the model and the control the trailblazer has in sourcing the best evidence on cost”.

Ashworth added, however, that if the ESFA’s review leads to new eligible costs being added, then all funding bands “will need to be updated to reflect these changes quickly”.

Minister refuses to offer transparency on apprenticeship levy spending

A top minister has refused to say whether the apprenticeship budget is still at risk of becoming overspent while revealing there are no plans to publish more transparent data on levy spending.

Joint HE and FE minister Michelle Donelan said the government is instead focused on the “key stats that really matter”, such as the number of people taking up apprenticeships and growing the programme’s brand.

She was speaking to FE Week to mark the 15th annual National Apprenticeships Week (read the full interview in our souvenir supplement – out on Monday).

Further education leaders and commentators have demanded greater transparency from the government on apprenticeship levy spending ever since the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education first warned the budget could go into the red in December 2018.

Months later the National Audit Office reported that the new-style apprenticeship standards were costing “around double what was expected” and warned of a potential “overspend in future”.

Then permanent secretary of the Department for Education Jonathan Slater told the education select committee in 2019 the levy budget “could be significantly overspent if we carried on, on the basis of current trends”.

Then skills minister Anne Milton later said the government was considering restrictions on employer usage of the levy, potentially by introducing a “pre-apprenticeship salary cap”.

But there has been radio silence from the government on the matter since then – perhaps partly due to the Covid-19 pandemic stifling starts numbers.

Donelan, who was appointed as universities minister in February 2020 and became joint HE and FE minister in September 2021, remained tight-lipped about the sustainability of the apprenticeships budget.

Asked repeatedly by FE Week whether the budget could be overspent in the near future, the minister dodged the question. “We are a government that has a primary focus on driving up apprenticeships at all levels, including degree apprenticeships, and I’m working with universities to ensure that becomes a reality year on year,” she said.

However, Donelan took issue with the notion that the apprenticeship budget could go “bust” as this “implies the whole thing is going to collapse, which is certainly not the case.

“I wouldn’t want anybody to be put off taking an apprentice because of this notion,” she said.

The minister, who also attends cabinet, added that the DfE is “always reviewing” the levy to “make sure that it is working as efficiently as effectively as it possibly can”.

The government has also been criticised since the launch of the apprenticeship levy for shrouding spending data in secrecy.

While there are vast amounts of statistics published about starts numbers, nothing is available for how much is spent annually by individual employers, whether they are levy- or non-levy payers, how much goes towards funding English and maths apprentices’ training, the ten per cent levy account top-up, and other aspects of the programme that the whole budget funds.

FE Week has been able to find out that some apprenticeships funding has been handed back to the Treasury in recent years, but very little national level data about levy spending is available.

Asked whether the government planned to make the spending more transparent, Donelan said “no… I think that the key stats that really matter are how many apprentices we have and how many employers we have got engaged because this is about ensuring that apprenticeships can open up opportunities for so many people.

“We’re really focusing on spreading apprenticeships and making sure that they’re a viable and available option across the country, because of the role that they can play in levelling up and reskilling and upskilling.”

ESFA to be stripped of policy role

The Education and Skills Funding Agency will be stripped of all post-16 policy and delivery duties following a major independent review of its effectiveness, FE Week can reveal.

Responsibility for those areas will be absorbed by the Department for Education from April.

The review, led by University of Sunderland vice chancellor Sir David Bell, will conclude that while there continues to be a need for the ESFA, its focus should be solely on funding. The agency will essentially become a contracts manager for post-16 FE funding, according to FE Week sources.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers warned there is a “real risk” that leaving all policy decisions to the DfE will “fail to recognise” the operational challenges providers face, while the Association of Colleges said the move “makes a lot of sense”.

The DfE shared preliminary findings of the review, which was commissioned by the Cabinet Office in August, with FE Week ahead of the full report’s publication next week.

A DfE spokesperson said the review found the ESFA had too much post-16 policy and delivery within its remit.

Policy areas the ESFA currently controls which will switch to the DfE include T Levels, higher technical qualifications, apprenticeship off-the-job training, flexi-job job apprenticeships, the adult education budget and traineeships.

It is unclear whether the provider market oversight team, led by top civil servant Matt Atkinson, will remain in the ESFA or move to the DfE.

FE Week understands that the new consolidated unit will put school sixth-form policy with the wider post-16 sector.

Sector leaders hope that a more united post-16 unit within the department will result in more coherence and consistency in, for example, the opening of new elite sixth forms proposed in the government’s levelling up white paper.

Hopes could be dashed for those wishing for even bigger changes, however. Sue Pember, a former senior civil servant of skills funding in the DfE and now policy director at adult education body HOLEX, said it would be a “lost opportunity to not do something more radical”.

The full review should, in Pember’s view, recommend a “joint further and higher education funding body, or a separate body to oversee academy funding”.

‘A joined-up approach will be vital’

David Hughes, the chief executive of the Association of Colleges, welcomed the review’s policy decision. “It looks like the move we have wanted, with DfE taking more of a systems-approach to working with colleges, schools, independent training providers and universities and thinking about how those institutions can work collaboratively to meet learner, community and employer needs,” he said.

The ESFA has faced criticism in recent years from parts of the FE sector due to its handling of various procurement exercises, including the apprenticeship non-levy tender, multiple adult education budget competitions for independent training providers, and the European Social Fund.

Hughes continued: “It [the independent review’s decision] will allow the ESFA to focus completely on the work it does to ensure vast sums of public money get to colleges and others effectively and efficiently. That is a highly complex job and ESFA has a strong track record of doing it with relatively few errors and problems, something that should never be taken for granted.”

Jane Hickie, the AELP’s chief executive, wasn’t as enthusiastic. “With the DfE taking on all post-16 policy, there is a real risk that policy design and implementation fails to recognise the operational challenges providers face,” she told FE Week.

“A joined-up approach between the DfE and the ESFA will be vital in ensuring providers are able to successfully deliver a high-quality set of programmes for learners.”

A DfE spokesperson said: “Consolidating all post-16 policy and delivery within one group [will] enable a high-quality, outcomes-focused post-16 system that gives learners the skills and knowledge they need to succeed in their working lives and meet the needs of the economy.

“This will allow the ESFA to continue to focus on making sure that public funds are properly spent, and that value for money for the taxpayer is achieved.”

World-class skills will level up local communities

For the UK to attract the investment that will level up communities, we need world-class skills, writes Neil Bentley-Gockmann.

Introducing the long-awaited Levelling Up White Paper, Michael Gove listed some of the United Kingdom’s successes. He talked up the size and strength of the economy, the dominance of the English language around the world and our universities’ place as global research and development superpowers.

All things that have seen us succeed at home and abroad. However, he was right to make clear that we need a change of approach if the government’s ambitious plans to level up are to succeed. 

And we believe that a crucial change is the need to develop a world-class skills economy to complement our already world-leading knowledge economy. 

This means the UK being recognised as a global leader in developing world-class apprenticeships and skills to help create high-quality jobs for young people in key future sectors. 

And our mission at WorldSkills UK is to help deliver on that by mainstreaming international best practice with colleges and training providers. We want to help more young people reach the high-quality standards employers and investors need to create high-skill high-paid jobs across the UK.

That’s why we are ever more focused on developing world-class skills to support local economic development in three ways.

Firstly, helping boost the quantity of skills. We are working to inspire more young people, from all backgrounds, to reach their potential through apprenticeships and technical careers with the chance to become world-class through national and international competition-based training programmes. 

Last year the national finals of our competitions programme took place in over 20 venues around the UK, allowing us to showcase the talent and hard work of hundreds of inspiring young people. We then saw thousands tune in from home or their colleges to watch the winners announced in a special live show presented by Steph McGovern from her Packed Lunch studio.

Registration for our 2022 competitions programme opens at the end of February. The winners could end up representing the UK on the international stage at EuroSkills in St Petersburg in 2023 and the WorldSkills ‘skills olympics’ in Lyon in 2024. Those that do will follow in the footsteps of the young people currently preparing for WorldSkills Shanghai in October, showcasing to the UK and rest of the world what it means to be world-class. 

Secondly, increasing the quality of skills. From our international training programme we have created a Centre of Excellence which allows our international training experts to share their world-class teaching with educators and uses our partner NCFE’s expertise to fire excellence in skills development. 

Now in its second year, the centre is already working in depth with around 40 colleges and training providers. Thisnumber will increase again next year, reaching tens of thousands of young people across the UK, while we are also constantly improving our hub of world-class online resources. 

Thirdly, helping to promote our high-quality skills. Our Skills Taskforce for Global Britain is currently exploring how we make sure more parts of the UK can use high-quality future skills to attract and retain valuable inward investment. The taskforce will deliver a report in the spring with recommendations on how to bring skills and inward investment delivery closer together to get the high-skilled, high-wage jobs local economies need.  

Put bluntly, if you want to attract investment you need high-quality skills, and if you want high-quality skills you need inward investment. With global competition for inward investment getting fiercer every year, the UK must add world-class skills to its international calling card. 

The global locations successfully bringing in foreign investment not only have a sophisticated skills offer to attract investors, but also target firms for the high-quality skills they can bring and for the positive productivity and spillover effects they have on the local skills base.

If the government’s levelling up agenda is to be realised – and we are to grow, be internationally competitive and create high quality jobs – we must develop, deliver and promote world-class skills.