Dame Christine Ryan, chair of the board of Ofsted, has announced she will step down next year.
The Department for Education will begin a formal process to find a successor shortly and Ryan will stay on in the interim to ensure a “smooth and orderly transition”, the watchdog said.
In a statement, Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, thanked Ryan for her leadership since taking up the post in 2020.
Bridget Phillipson
“Christine has led the Ofsted board as chair during a period of significant challenges, including the unprecedented demands of the pandemic,” Phillipson said.
“Over the past four years, she has overseen critical initiatives, including reviews of board effectiveness, a substantial renewal of board membership, a successful transition to a new Chief Inspector, supported Ofsted’s Big Listen, the largest public consultation in its history, and conducted a comprehensive review of Ofsted’s corporate governance arrangements.”
Ofsted said until her successor was appointed, the board under Ryan’s leadership will focus on “scoping governance reforms” to implement Dame Christine Gilbert’s recent independent review.
Gilbert’s damning review found the watchdog’s response to headteacher Ruth Perry’s death appeared to be “defensive and complacent” and said Ofsted must move away “from the discourse that ‘inspectors are never wrong”.
The watchdog accepted her recommendation to review its governance framework to “strengthen the role” of the board to help reduce the “entitlement” of the chief inspector.
Today, the inspectorate said this work will “strengthen accountability and oversee Ofsted’s commitments to improved service delivery”.
“These efforts will support a newly appointed chair to take forward an ambitious, longer-term reform agenda.”
‘Much left to accomplish’
Ryan said it had been a “privilege” to chair Ofsted, but there was still “much to accomplish in the months ahead”.
“Of course, there have been challenges – from the impact of the pandemic at the outset of my tenure, to the scrutiny and changes of more recent times,” she said.
“The work Ofsted does is vital in ensuring that children and young people receive the education and care they deserve.”
She added: “As I prepare to hand over to a new chair, I will leave with pride in my association with Ofsted and deep gratitude for its dedicated staff. I wish Sir Martyn Oliver and the team the very best for the future.”
Ryan was chief inspector and chief executive of the Independent Schools Inspectorate from 2005 to 2017.
Concurrent Job: Group Chief People Officer, Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Interesting fact: David spends his spare time (trying to) play golf despite being regularly outclassed by his two daughters, who have played for their country on several occasions
Steve Holliday
Chair of Trustees, Generation UK
Start date: October 2024
Previous Job: Former Chair, Crisis
Interesting fact: Steve recently cycled from Edinburgh to London raising money for Crisis (after serving as Chair of the charity for 9 years
Employers who refuse to release apprentices for off-the-job training in work hours are harming learners’ mental health, according to research.
The study also found confusion about what counts as off-the-job training is triggering anxiety among apprentices.
And experts say a lack of understanding of the controversial policy among employers and apprentices limits achievement rates.
The survey of 1,000 training providers, 90 employers and 195 apprentices by software company OneFile sought to reveal the key barriers to reaching the government’s 67 per cent national achievement rate target by 2025. The current achievement rate, for 2022/23, is 54 per cent.
Respondents were unanimous that off-the-job training – a legal requirement introduced following the levy reforms in 2017 – was the most frequent obstacle.
The rule originally required apprentices to spend at least 20 per cent of their normal working hours on off-the-job training, before it was replaced by a six-hour per week baseline figure in 2022.
What qualifies as off-the-job training varies by apprenticeship and sector, but it must focus on developing new knowledge, skills and behaviours. It must also take place outside the day-to-day role but during normal, paid working hours.
More than a third (36 per cent) of training providers surveyed said employers not giving apprentices time to complete off-the-job learning during work hours was their biggest difficulty when it came to achievement.
And 32 percent of employers admitted the most challenging aspect of apprenticeship delivery was finding time for apprentices to complete off-the-job learning.
Meanwhile, 51 per cent of the surveyed apprentices said having more time to do off-the-job training would make it easier to complete their apprenticeship.
Around a quarter said they had felt stressed or anxious in the past year of their training. The most common cause was “not being able to manage the demands of the job and college work” (57 per cent) and “not completely understanding what’s required of me” (43 per cent) with off-the-job training.
The OneFile researchers said: “Employers have a legal obligation to provide enough time during working hours for their apprentices to complete their OTJ work. This is clearly not happening often enough.
“The workload is clearly a source of stress and anxiety for many apprentices. While pressure is part and parcel of the world of work, it is a concern this pressure is excessive for the apprentice at such an early stage of their career. More must be done now to manage mental health and wellbeing.”
Last year, scores of big-name apprenticeship levy-paying businesses called on the government to rename the off-the-job training policy, warning that the “confusing” title was exacerbating high withdrawal rates.
England’s largest apprenticeship provider, Lifetime Training, led the call. The firm’s previous chief executive, Jon Graham, argued that the terminology was “out-dated” as it “relates to models of training which require apprentices to spend time away from the workplace, rather than the work-based approach.”
He said at the time: “It does not reflect the current reality of apprenticeship delivery or the learner experience. The result is a perception that this training must be carried out at home or after hours. This is not the case.”
Employers and training providers in OneFile’s research agreed that allocating more time to do OTJ training and improving communication with the training provider and apprentice would improve completion rates.
Emily Rock, CEO of the Association of Apprentices, said: “Apprentices tell us they need off-the-job training, and employers recognise this and want to provide it, but operational and business challenges get in the way.
“This is an area that could be fixed at little or no cost, but solving it would significantly impact apprentice engagement and retention and employer buy-in.”
Tina McKenzie, policy chair at the Federation of Small Businesses, recommended that the Department for Education develops a toolkit to help small employers monitor and comply with the off-the-job training requirement.
A row between staff and bosses worsened at University and College Union this week after new strike dates were announced following news of a restructure.
Unite the Union, which represents 80 percent of the 216 UCU trade union employees, called three days of action from December 9 to 11.
Unite claims the UCU is “prioritising” the staff restructure instead of resolving its eight-month-long industrial dispute.
But the UCU said the strike was a “completely disproportionate response to an employer consultation”.
The two parties have been embroiled in an industrial dispute since March over complaints about workplace racism, workplace stress and alleged breaches of collective agreements.
A walkout was staged during UCU’s national congress in May, and talks have been ongoing since Unite suspended indefinite strike action which was due to start on September 9.
‘Unnecessary’
In June, UCU general secretary Jo Grady announced the union would conduct a “full review of staffing” following the annual congress.
Last week she held an all-staff meeting detailing a consultation to streamline the organisational structure and make “very limited revisions” to the job descriptions of 14 employees.
A few days later, Unite passed a motion at an emergency special general meeting that questioned the timing of the restructure and resolved to use the existing live ballot to announce strike action “as soon as possible.”
Based on its current mandate, voted on in May when 72 per cent voted to strike from a 79 per cent turnout, the branch agreed to fresh dates for industrial action.
Unite claims the restructure will impact nearly a quarter of UCU staff, including “detrimental changes” to at least 10 members and modifications to the job descriptions of the equalities team and the all-female national bargaining unit comprising Unite’s branch chair and vice chair Jenny Lennox and Marianne Quick.
A Unite UCU spokesperson said: “The employer may choose to claim differently, but this is a significant restructure which directly impacts a quarter of UCU staff, and it has negative ramifications for the organisation as a whole as well as UCU members.
“UCU Unite members’ working conditions are UCU members’ bargaining conditions. None of those things are going to improve until UCU starts behaving like a decent employer.”
The staff union has advised members to refrain from attending individual consultations on job and contract alterations. In the meantime, it has called for a pause to the consultation until the results of the independent review of UCU’s organisational culture concludes.
UCU hit back at Unite, claiming it is simply asking for views on “limited proposed changes”, which could be subject to change based on feedback.
A UCU spokesperson said: “These proposals are in response to listening to recommendations from members, staff, and Unite UCU themselves. There are no redundancies or job cuts, and five new posts have been created.
“We are confused and extremely concerned about the decision by Unite UCU to call three days of strike action in response to such limited proposed changes to staffing.”
UCU bosses urged Unite to reconsider the “unnecessary” strike action, which it said “undermines any efforts” to resolve the dispute and “puts the intentions of Unite in doubt”.
They said: “We hope that Unite UCU reconsider this action so that we can all focus on the important work of supporting UCU members fighting for better pay and conditions, as well as those facing redundancies and course closures across the UK.”
Funding for Rishi Sunak’s flagship policy to improve UK adults’ maths skills ends in March, the government has confirmed.
The former prime minister hoped to “change people’s lives” when he revealed his “bespoke adult numeracy programme” Multiply in 2021.
Up to £560 million was set aside for a three-year period, part of the larger UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) that replaced European Union funding.
Sunak aimed to improve “poor” adult maths skills, based on estimates that about half the working-age population has the numeracy level of a primary school child.
A share of the budget was allocated to metro mayors and councils across England, which had flexibility to pay for courses they felt met local maths needs.
Last month the government reduced its commitment to the UKSPF from £1.5 billion to £900 million without confirming whether Multiply would continue.
The Department for Education, which was responsible for signing off each area’s Multiply plans, has now told FE Week the programme will end in March “as intended”.
Local government expert Jack Shaw said the Multiply programme was “poorly rolled-out” by the previous administration and “struggled to gain the momentum it needed” leading to an overall underspend.
Rishi Sunak’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
What is Multiply?
The aim of the programme was to boost people’s ability to use maths in daily life by offering free, flexible courses to people over age 19 who didn’t have a grade four or above in GCSE maths, or an equivalent qualification.
This fell under the previous government’s “levelling up” mission to secure a significant increase in the number of people who had completed high-quality skills training by 2030.
Public bodies commissioning courses from colleges, independent training providers and voluntary sector organisations were given flexibility to choose from a “menu” of course types, as long as they didn’t overlap with existing adult education.
These included courses designed to increase confidence with maths, money management, support for parents and carers, small business bookkeeping and employer-focused maths.
Did it work?
The decision to end Multiply comes before evaluations of its success are published.
The DfE hopes to receive the final report of a full national evaluation next autumn, six months after the programme ends, and has also commissioned randomised control trials into learner outcomes.
However, statistics released on Thursday suggest positive outcomes, with 68 per cent of 188,000 learners achieving in the first two years (2022-23 and 2023-24).
A DfE spokesperson said a core aim of the programme was to gather evidence about what works, and the findings of the evaluations will provide valuable lessons for future policy development.
Sue Pember, policy director at adult education network Holex, said: “The scheme has been instrumental in fostering collaboration and innovation across learning organisations and the voluntary sector, and we are confident that its legacy will continue to have a lasting impact.
“The amount of information and performance data each provider had to supply… you will see that this has been a robustly managed programme with several levels of scrutiny.
“Compared to skills bootcamps, this has been the gold standard of performance management.”
Local authority praise
Local authorities such as Essex County Council, which received a £7.9 million budget, said more than 8,600 learners benefitted from courses.
The county’s most popular courses were money management and family learning, with the highest uptake in Basildon, Colchester and Harlow.
Derby City Council said its Multiply programme was a “great success”.
Its “innovative” courses included maths embedded into creative arts and cooking on a budget courses.
Anna Mimms, head of employment, skills and adult education at the city council, said: “I don’t think there’s ever been a government initiative that has produced so many cakes.
“All of us found so many ways of using food… we’ve all done some quite joyous things.”
But as with the wider UKSPF, the programme’s launch was delayed by months while some local authorities waited for the government to sign off their investment plans.
This caused underspends, with only 27 per cent of the £270 million budget forecast to be spent by March, according to DfE estimates published this summer.
What’s next?
The DfE said councils and mayors can continue to fund other adult numeracy courses through UKSPF.
Derby City Council said it is “investigating alternative funding” to continue with maths projects, while Essex County Council said residents can continue to learn through community providers such as ACL Essex.
Marguerite Hogg, senior policy manager in adult education at the Association of Colleges, said: “Multiply has been a revelation in finding new and innovative ways to support adults with numeracy skills.
“We understand that there will be flexibility within UKSPF for mayoral combined authorities to continue to offer numeracy programmes to adults, even if they are not badged as Multiply.”
Around £240 million could be freed up in the apprenticeship budget if the government goes ahead with plans to remove level 7 apprenticeships from levy funding, data suggests.
Spending figures on master’s-level apprenticeships were released in response to a parliamentary question in the House of Commons this week.
When the apprenticeship levy launched in 2017-18, just £12 million was spent on the controversial apprenticeships. This figure rocketed to £238 million in 2023-24.
Although spending on level 7 apprenticeships has stagnated for the past three years, it accounts for around 10 percent of the Department for Education’s overall apprenticeship budget.
Ministers are working on plans to remove level 7 apprenticeships from the scope of levy funding because the budget is at breaking point and forecast to soon go overspent, largely due to the rise in higher-level apprenticeships which are the most expensive to deliver.
The cash freed up from defunding level 7s will aid Labour’s plan to expand the apprenticeship levy into a growth and skills levy that funds a wider range of training programmes.
Level 7 apprenticeship starts are dominated by the accountancy or taxation professional and senior leader standards. But other popular programmes include advanced clinical practitioner, solicitor, academic professional, chartered town planner, district nurse and community nurse specialist practitioner.
Supporters of the courses claim most level 7 apprentices are under the age of 25 and hail from the public sector, with the NHS and councils set to be significantly impacted.
Ministers claim that if employers truly value level 7 apprenticeships they will continue to fund the programmes themselves.
The Association of Employers and Learning Providers insists the level 7 axe can be avoided if the £800 million gap between the amount employers pay into the levy and the government-set apprenticeship budget is plugged.
The Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts that £4 billion will be raised in apprenticeship levy receipts by UK companies in 2024-25.
Yet the DfE’s ring-fenced budget to fund apprenticeships in England is £2.73 billion, while the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receive around £500 million between them.
Ben Rowland, AELP CEO, said: “If the government is going to proceed down this route – and we don’t think it should – it must do so in a way that employers can understand and work with. This means phasing in any changes over time to prevent sudden cliff edges.
“There is a real chance that in its blunt efforts to make employers invest more in training, the government actually achieves the opposite: employers, frustrated by yet another shift in the goalposts, could well turn their back on training, rather than leaning into it.”
Dozens of colleges that threatened to take awarding body Pearson to court over this summer’s GCSE English resit controversy have ditched their legal action.
Luminate Education Group led the charge for a judicial review on behalf of 31 colleges that signed a collective complaint in August and sent a pre-action protocol legal letter a month later.
But following crunch talks last week, the colleges dropped the litigation after deciding a “long legal battle would not serve students’ interest”.
The row stems from what the colleges claimed was an “unprecedented” 11-mark increase in the grade boundary needed for a grade 4 ‘pass’ in Pearson’s GCSE English language 2.0 exam.
Teachers and leaders said the “shock” hike, which was communicated just a day before results day in August, caused lower-than-expected pass rates and left thousands of borderline students who were predicted to pass distraught.
In one case, a Luminate student scored 54 marks with Pearson in 2023 and improved to 80 marks in 2024 but still only achieved a grade 3.
Pearson apologised for the poor timing of communication and explained the significant grade boundary rise was necessary to bring the qualification “in line with the national GCSE English Language standard”.
The awarding giant did offer a 15 per cent rebate to affected colleges for 2023-24 entries – which would have cost Pearson hundreds of thousands of pounds – and offered free-of-charge re-marks which usually cost almost £50 per paper.
After taking legal advice, Luminate took the view that a judicial review would have resulted in a ruling that Pearson acted “unlawfully and unfairly”.
But following a meeting with Pearson last week, the group, which is made up of six colleges in Yorkshire and had the largest number of entries to Pearson’s 2.0 exam, said a legal victory would “not change anything in a positive way for students or colleges”.
Instead, Luminate and Pearson have “agreed to work together and campaign for positive change that will help create a better system”.
Luminate CEO Colin Booth told FE Week his team was “as certain as we could be” that a judge would find in favour of the colleges but there was “nothing we could ask for in terms of redress of that, that a court was likely to force to happen”.
Any judicial review would have been carried over to next year, and the ideal outcome, a change in students’ grades, would be unlikely.
Booth said the collective college complaint has always been about the “wider impact” it could have by sparking a national debate on the flaws in the resits policy. He wants awarding bodies to develop new GCSE English and maths qualifications specifically targeted at post-16 students who are forced to resit if they fail to achieve a grade 4 ‘pass’ at school.
Over 86 per cent (41,268) of the 47,819 students who took the Pearson 2.0 GCSE English examination in summer 2024 were aged 17 or older.
Raising the grade 4 ‘pass’ boundary by 11 marks reduced the grade 4 ‘pass’ rate by 16.7 percentage points, moving from 37.4 per cent in summer 2023 to 20.7 per cent. The change left many students, the majority of which were taught within colleges, a whole grade poorer than if they had sat the exam in 2023.
Colleges believe Pearson’s decision to move the goalposts was the dominant reason behind an overall drop in post-16 GCSE English pass rates. Results day revealed that 20.9 per cent of the 148,569 England-based students resitting their English language GCSE achieved a grade 4 pass, five percentage points lower than in 2023.
Booth said: “Pearson’s English 2.0 qualification highlights an assessment system simply not built in the interests of further education colleges or our students.
“We would like national policy to support a post-16 GSCE English qualification that would likely feature modular assessment rather than summative, with less creative writing and more focus on practical English skills for the workplace and for life skills. The same design principles should also be applied to creating a post-16 GCSE maths qualification.”
A spokesperson for Pearson said: “We apologise for not clearly communicating to schools and colleges during the 2023-2024 academic year the fact that grade boundaries may change – sometimes significantly – and for the impact this had on students, educators, parents, and guardians on results day.”
Pearson agreed it is “evident” the current resits policy is “not meeting the needs of many students and we need a new approach”.
David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said: “The increase in the grade boundary by Pearson between 2023 and 2024 resulted in many students improving their performance but failing to achieve the much-coveted grade 4.
“The increase should have been communicated far earlier so that colleges and students could understand where the achievement bar was for 2024.
“I applaud Luminate for pursuing this with the other colleges, and also for stepping back now to focus on the needs of future learners.”
The government is currently running an independent curriculum and assessment review led by Becky Francis, who is expected to recommend changes to resit rules.
Most of us are familiar with the term racism, but how many of us are aware of racial fatigue? The idea refers to the emotional and psychological toll experienced by individuals who face racism and discrimination throughout their lives – personal and professional.
Racial fatigue is not just about isolated incidents, but rather the ongoing exposure to systemic racism, microaggressions and bias. This chronic exposure can lead to feelings of exhaustion, frustration and even trauma.
Dr. Rita Kohli’s book, Teachers of Color: Resisting Racism and Reclaiming Education explores how culturally diverse teachers continue to face negative racial experiences daily – experiences that mirror the racial trauma they endured as children.
This doesn’t just come from students but from colleagues as well, exacerbating their racial stress and increasing what is known as ‘racial battle fatigue’, a term first coined by Professor William A. Smith in 2003.
It is important to understand that racism often affects individuals from childhood through to adulthood. Experiences of racism during formative years can shape one’s perception of self-worth, belonging and potential.
Staff who experienced racism when they were younger may find themselves facing the same issues repeatedly as they enter education or the workforce.
There are many different types of racist behaviour and attitudes in the workplace. These include microaggressions, code-switching, being overlooked for jobs (despite being more than qualified), being excluded from key conversations, being treated ruthlessly or unfairly when mistakes are made (compared to other colleagues), and being invisible when things go right and yet hyper-visible when things go wrong.
Cumulatively, any number of these can lead to racial battle fatigue, whereby staff invest a significant amount of time and energy into thinking about and dealing with racism.
In turn, this can manifest itself in a wide range of negative reactions and emotions including hypervigilance (sometimes called the “superhero syndrome”), lowered aspirations, self-censorship, isolation, social withdrawal, exhaustion, anxiety, frustration, anger or anger suppression, helplessness, hopelessness and depression.
It is essential to acknowledge the lifelong burden that racism imposes on ethnically diverse individuals so that we can create a safe and inclusive environment that recognises and addresses their negative lived experiences.
Here are some tips for how to do exactly that.
Education and awareness
Provide cultural awareness and anti-racism training to all staff to promote understanding of and empathy towards different experiences and perspectives. Senior leaders should take this seriously and role-model inclusive behaviour in their communication with staff and students.
Open dialogue
Encourage open and honest conversations about race, racism and discrimination, creating a safe space for employees to share their experiences and concerns without fear of repercussions.
Support networks
Establish employee resource groups or affinity networks to provide a sense of community and support for ethnically diverse staff, and safe spaces for students.
Review policies and practices
Regularly assess and update policies to ensure they are inclusive and free from bias, promoting equal opportunities for all employees and students. (Compliance does not always translate into a culture of psychological safety.)
Mentorship and sponsorship
Encourage programmes that support the career growth and development of ethnically diverse employees. Also consider reverse mentoring to enhance leaders’ personal understanding of these issues.
Celebrate diversity
Recognising and mark cultural events and holidays to foster a sense of belonging and appreciation for different backgrounds. This should be done sincerely, not just by publicising certain groups during specific times (like Black History Month) but throughout the year as an ongoing process.
In addition, Dr Kohli provides the following useful list of questions for managers and leaders to consider:
What kinds of contributions are you expecting from teachers of colour, and how do those expectations differ from your expectations for white teachers?
How do you communicate your trust and value of teachers of colour? Do you listen to their insights and understandings?
How do you invest in the growth, leadership and vision of teachers of colour? Do you (materially) recognise their unique assets and strengths through compensation, in formal evaluations and in leadership opportunities?
By understanding the manifestations of racial fatigue and implementing inclusive practices, managers can actively combat it and create an environment where all students and employees feel valued, supported and empowered.
The labour market is in the middle of a critical transformation towards sustainable economic growth and productivity. Labour’s industrial strategy and its curriculum and assessment review both highlight the centrality of skills to achieving its missions for government, but which skills? And how?
Among the many sectors experiencing shortfalls of essential skills in the workforce and growing skills gaps, construction and infrastructure play a particularly crucial role in the central initiative to ‘get Britain building again’.
The Federation for Master Builders reports that we need over 240,000 workers in construction over the next four years to meet demand. This severe shortage of skilled workers is placing an increasing burden on economic growth targets and national projects.
But focusing on technical skills will not be enough.
What skills?
Essential skills like problem-solving, teamwork and communication are equally important. In fact, people with higher levels of essential skills experience improved social mobility, employment, earnings and greater job and life satisfaction.
They also work as a platform for developing other skills such as literacy and numeracy, as well as technical skills. Overlooking them means overlooking a key driver of growth and productivity, with an estimated cost in 2022 of £22.2 billion.
We know that those from more disadvantaged backgrounds tend to have fewer opportunities to acquire and demonstrate essential skills, so they’re as important for social mobility as for economic growth.
Boosting productivity involves employers playing their part to develop essential skills in the workforce.
But how? Here are two companies that demonstrate the key elements of a successful approach.
Staff development
Amey, an infrastructure company, started using the Skills Builder Partnership’s Universal Framework in its apprenticeship and graduate programme in 2022.
A series of ten workshops initially supported employees to understand essential skills, identify their strengths and areas for development using the framework, and set actionable goals for improvement.
Amey has since trained line managers across the business to support their teams, enabling them to coach apprentices and graduates in essential skills. It has also integrated reflective practice into formal review processes.
The programme has received overwhelmingly positive feedback and staff report meaningful progress in essential skills development.
Prioritising problem-solving, collaboration and communication in a supportive environment is allowing Amey to address immediate skills gaps and increasing the adaptability and resilience of its workforce.
Recruitment processes
At Morgan Sindall Infrastructure, using the framework to recruit early-career roles widened the talent pool and improved the quality of candidate applications.
As a first step, we worked with the company to pinpoint the key skills required for success in various roles, particularly apprenticeships. We then supported them to reframe requirements using the framework to clearly articulate the desired essential skills.
With job descriptions now appealing to a wider talent pool, Morgan Sindall Infrastructure then used the framework throughout the recruitment process to inform group exercises, presentations and interview questions, ensuring a consistent approach to candidate evaluation, benchmarking and feedback.
Since embedding essential skills into their recruitment processes, the organisation has experienced a 170-per cent increase in candidates deemed suitable for roles, as well as greater applicant diversity.
So embedding essential skills is not only transformative for recruitment but it also unlocks the untapped potential of huge numbers of previously excluded potential recruits.
Long-term investment
The challenge of skills shortages in these industries is not one that can be solved overnight, and the government’s commitment to increase Britain’s building and infrastructure capacity can only be realised if we have the workforce to support it.
To truly unleash the potential of the construction and infrastructure sectors to drive our national economic recovery, government and employers alike must invest in essential skills.
Employers adopt the Universal Framework in staff development, supporting their adaptability in an evolving economy. They also use it to recruit workers with the skills they need, reaping the benefits of a wider talent pool.
As to government, it must not lose sight of what have often been dismissively dubbed in education as ‘soft skills’. They are, in fact, essential, and young people should be developing them long before they reach the workplace.
If we want to ensure infrastructure projects are delivered on time and to the highest standards, and if we want to set the country on a path to long-term prosperity, essential skills are… well… essential.
