This week, the Skills and Post-16 Education Bill was presented to Parliament.

Following on from the Skills for Jobs White Paper, published in January, the bill will make it a legal requirement for employers and colleges to collaborate and develop skills plans, so that the training on offer meets the need of local areas. It will also give every adult access to a flexible loan for higher-level education and training at university or college, usable at any point in their lives.

Education secretary Gavin Williamson said the bill “marks a significant milestone in our journey to transform the skills, training and post-16 education landscape, and level up opportunities across the country”.

But what do the sector leaders think?

Skills bill: £83m to future-proof further education

Skills for Jobs White Paper: What does it propose?

Need to know: The Skills and Post-16 Education Bill

‘Getting the balance between accountability and intervention powers is a bit like walking a tightrope’

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges

“The Skills and Post-16 Education Bill puts post-16 education, skills and colleges in the forefront of the government’s priorities as we look to a post-pandemic and post-Brexit world. I am optimistic that the government will back this up with its full support as they enter into the spending review discussions later this year: the only way to bring this ambitious and wide-reaching legislation to life is with fair and long-term funding from the chancellor to back it up. 

“We look forward to hearing details next month on the proposals around what will trigger interventions, and how Department for Education (DfE) proposes to measure and assess the degree to which colleges are meeting local needs. Getting the balance between accountability and intervention powers is a bit like walking a tightrope, and requires careful consideration and fine tuning. But colleges are confident that they meet local learner and employer needs, so we’re confident that there is a way to ensure the measures are fair and proportionate.”

‘Places too much power in the hands of the secretary of state’

Tom Bewick, chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies (FAB) 

“The bill, as currently drafted, places too much power in the hands of the secretary of state. It is top-down and overly centralised. For example, the sign-off of local skills improvement plans should be a reserve power of last resort. Instead, all local areas will have to submit plans for sign-off directly to the Department for Education. We need a skills system that promotes higher-trust working, and part of that is about empowering local civic leaders to do the right thing by their local communities, including college principals. It is very hard to see how the current bill does anything other than perpetuate the low-trust working culture that has come to symbolise the relationship between those operating at the front line and officials in the bureaucracies. 

“On qualifications, FAB’s members will want to really understand the difference between the powers of regulation and those of accreditation outlined in the draft legislation. We welcome a tidying up of accountabilities between Ofqual and IfATE (Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education) contained in the bill. However, sweeping powers to accredit technical courses by the institute could result in a conflict situation arising where, de facto, the institute starts to operate more like a national awarding body, except with no external quality check or challenge to what they do. I think it is fair to say that legislators are going to be busy putting down amendments to improve the legislation and get the balance right between national leadership and local control.” 

LSIP should not be “set up by the DfE as a trojan horse”

Jane Hickie, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers

“AELP welcomed the employer-informed approach of the white paper and is therefore generally comfortable with the direction of travel that the bill is pursuing, providing that it preserves the employer demand-led principles that successive governments have adopted since the 2006 Leitch review and which are now firmly embedded in the provision of apprenticeships.

“The Lords can play a very useful role in probing the government on how the legislation’s clauses on local skills improvement plans will apply in practice to ITPs, especially as the impact assessment document states that the duty to ‘have regard’ to local skills improvement plans does not mean that an ITP is required to implement the local skills improvement plan or deliver the skills needs outlined in the plan.

“AELP hopes that LSIPs are not being set up by the DfE as a trojan horse which then act as decision-makers over how funding is allocated locally. Nor should they become closed shops for favoured colleges and providers because they then become another supply-side mechanism which could interfere in genuine demand for skills expressed by employers and learners. ITPs are renowned for their responsiveness in meeting the demand for skills from their local SMEs, also implicitly acknowledged by the impact assessment document which says that the employer representative bodies point to difficulty in accessing support from colleges.  So nothing in this bill should get in the way of well-established ITP responsiveness.

“We have no argument with new legislative measures to protect the interests of learners if ministers feel more are necessary but they should be proportionate. AELP supports and understands why providers on the list of relevant providers should be ‘fit and proper persons’. Student support plans are already required by the ESFA rules.  Where we have serious concerns however is that being on the list will, according to the government, have ‘significant impact’ on the costs of smaller providers because for example of the imposition of professional indemnity insurance.  If this is a backdoor method of trying to reduce the number of ITPs in the market, it could backfire because many are either specialist providers or serve areas out of easy reach of a local college. The bill’s provisions on this require therefore careful scrutiny.”

‘An ambitious roadmap for change’

Jennifer Coupland, chief executive at the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education

“There is no longer just one road to career success, we want everyone to be able to switch on the sat nav at any stage in life and choose a new destination.

“Putting employers at the very heart of decision making to help meet local skills needs will help to pave the road ahead. The Institute is looking forward to playing an even bigger role with employers to build a unified skills system that delivers on this ambitious roadmap for change.”

‘An important first step to accommodating the 260,000 additional 16- to 19-year-olds’

Bill Watkin, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association (SFCA) 

“We are delighted to see the launch of the new 16-19 capacity fund. SFCA has been making the case for a dedicated capital expansion fund for 16-19 providers since 2018, and this was one of two recommendations we made ahead of the 2020 spending round in November.

“Our members have been eagerly awaiting the detail since then, and we expect a significant number to submit a bid to expand their estate in order to create more student places. The fund will benefit institutions in areas where there is a demographic increase in this age group and it is an important first step to accommodating the 260,000 additional 16-to 19-year-olds that will participate in education in the coming years. Although the £83 million announced today is only for one year, we hope a longer-term deal can be struck in the forthcoming spending review.”

‘A once-in-a-generation chance to level the playing field between all the options after secondary school’

Clare Marchant, chief executive of Ucas

“Enabling students to make the right choice about their future is in our DNA, be that a degree apprenticeship, a higher technical qualification or a part-time, flexible course.

“Half of prospective students told us they were interested in apprenticeships and, in the past year alone, apprenticeship opportunities on Ucas.com have been viewed over a million times.

“The Skills and Post-16 Education Bill is a once-in-a-generation chance to level the playing field between all the options after secondary school, which is why Ucas is investing heavily in our content and service to ensure people can explore all their options in a single, trusted location.”

‘This is not a revolution in lifelong learning’

Simon Parkinson, general secretary and chief executive of the WEA 

“The skills bill will bring significant changes to the skills landscape, but it is not a revolution in lifelong learning. The bill is quiet on support for any qualifications below level 3 and also support for subjects outside a narrow band of technical disciplines. We have argued that these lower-level qualifications offer many adult learners key progression routes and, also, that they lead to skills and behaviours which employers value.

“We do not necessarily expect these omissions to be addressed directly in the bill but we believe that the funding system must continue to support a wide range of adult education and skills, including non-accredited provision and qualifications below level 3. Otherwise, many adults will be left behind.”

‘It should help thousands of people get back into work or further their career’

Luke Goodlet, director of operations at the Skills Network 

“After countless previous unsuccessful attempts to ensure local skills and training offers align properly with local employers’ needs, we welcome the Skills and Post-16 Education Bill legislation. By putting employers and businesses at the centre of the creation of local skills improvement plans, the legislation will force training providers and colleges to ensure their offering aligns with the real workforce needs of local employers, which ultimately should help thousands of people get back into work or further their career.”