2 November 2007

A couple of weeks ago and almost 11 months to the day when it was first laid before Parliament, the Further Education and Training Bill received the Royal Assent. Drawn up to implement proposals in the 2006 FE White Paper and the Foster proposals before that, the Bill has attracted little attention amongst the hum of activity going on elsewhere in the learning and skills sector. Some people have even questioned whether it was needed at all; restructuring of the LSC was already happening, intervention powers were not sought and as the Shadow Skills Spokesman said in the Commons debate, “this Bill is a wasted opportunity.”

Things have certainly moved on since the Bill was first drafted. As it is, we are about to embark on a further round of intense consultation on the nature of the whole skills system while minds are already turning to the next Bill, this time on the extension of the compulsory participation age. But it would be wrong to dismiss this Act too quickly, for amongst its clauses are two important Sections. One is Section 19 which grants FE institutions in England the power to award foundation degrees and the other is Section 24 A and B which provides the statutory basis for the London Skills and Employment Board.

Section 19 has not been without its controversies. Announced seemingly out of the blue in the build up to the Bill, it amends section 76 of the 1992 Act to enable the Privy Council to ‘grant FE institutions in England the power to award only foundation degrees.’ The case for this is threefold. First, that as the Minister said at the time, many colleges have earned the right to be able to award at this level of provision. Secondly, a large amount of this HE provision is now offered through colleges anyway so it seems sensible to formally endorse it. And thirdly, Leitch of course has just jacked up ambitions at this level, “by 2014, we will aim for 36% of adults to be qualified to level 4 and above, up from 29% in 2005.” Such an ambition requires both sectors, FE and HE, to put their collective shoulders to the wheel.

The case against was laid out in UUK Papers at the time and summarised neatly in the Times Higher in June also as three issues; quality will be compromised, progression stymied and collaboration torpedoed. Many of these concerns were aired when the Bill reached the House of Lords where some important caveats were discussed. These have been enshrined in the Bill. Thus, QAA will advise on whether applicant institutions have met the conditions to gain the right to award foundation degrees; institutions must identify progression opportunities in advance; powers will be granted for ‘a probationary period’ of 6 years; during this period awarding powers will be restricted to ‘persons enrolled at the institution;’ and the Secretary of State will report back after 4 years on how it’s all gone.

It’s difficult to tell at this stage how many colleges will seize the opportunity. The Government is on record as wanting to increase foundation degree student numbers by 40,000 to 100,000 by 2010. A HEFCE Report earlier this year indicated steady rather than dramatic foundation degree growth while of course HNs still provide a solid offer in many sectors. It is one of those truisms of economic reports that countries with high volumes of higher intermediate skills in their workforce, perform much better and the UK cannot afford to fall behind in this regard. Section 19 may yet have a part to play in this.

Section 24 A and B allow the Secretary of State to “specify a body to formulate a strategy in relation to specified functions of the LSC.” Much of this was provoked by the setting up of the London Skills and Employment Board (LSEB) last year and with fine timing the Board has just released its draft strategy for ‘Skills and Employment in London.’ This may seem a London only matter what with Crossrail, the Olympics, a growing but transient workforce and so on but in fact this offers a hugely important blueprint for city regions to follow in the future.

Currently the Board can set the strategic direction for the LSC’s £560m adult skills budget in London but it won’t stop there. Already the Board is targeting the DWP’s welfare to work budget for London, let alone the young people’s budget as it looks to develop a totally integrated planning and development strategy.

A lot in the Plan has a familiar feel to it. There’s support for collaborative working, integrated advice and support, greater employer involvement, a more responsive supply side and “broad support for the strengthening of SSCs.” But what makes the Plan so significant is that it’s the first time that many of these strategic principles have been earthed within a regional context. So alongside national targets are local London based aspirations including increasing London’s employment rate to 72% by 2013, reducing the proportion of Londoners without any qualifications to 11% also by 2013, and increasing the participation in training of those in work to 15% in the same time frame.

The Plan identifies five “challenges for action.”

First, a “fundamental change” on the help and support side, building the motivation of individuals and supporting them at key points in their lives and careers. Pre employment support, integrated JCP services, targeted support for those with difficulties are all in there with the emphasis very much on an effective London wide careers service. The model illustrated is that of the US Career Voyages whose website “provides information on high growth industries and in demand occupations along with the skills and education to get jobs in such areas.”

Second, “an ambitious new Employer Programme” including interestingly, “a new top notch brokerage system.” Third, “ a new level of responsiveness from the provider side;” not just the opening up of the publicly funded learning and skills market as well as closer linkages between LSC and HEFCE funding but a much stronger focus for London colleges on employability and progression. “We want London’s FE colleges to collectively develop change management programmes to remodel the sector and develop close links with employers.” Fourth, a much more integrated skills and employment infrastructure. “We are not proposing at this stage major structural change,” rather more joined up vision, planning, targets and resources. Finally, “we want Government to give London a fair and appropriate share of the public investment cake.”

On this basis Londoners at least could forget the general election, it’s next May’s London Mayoral election that could have the more immediate impact on their lives.

© Edexcel Policy Watch 2007. Steve Besley is General Manger of Education Policy at Edexcel. Policy watch is a service intended to help busy people understand developments in the world of education. Visit Edexcel at www.edexcel.org.uk