26 SEP 2016
There is a lot of critique and opinion in the media at the moment as FE experts go head to head about recent changes proposed to the apprenticeship scheme budget.
There is a lot of critique and opinion in the media at the moment as FE experts go head to head about recent changes proposed to the apprenticeship scheme budget. The overall landscape is fraught with a ‘back and forth’ argument over the issues – but where do we stand?
With cuts proposed to apprenticeship funding, many in FE are expressing concern and anger about the changes. FE Week has shown that the proposed changes will slash the rates for 16 – 18 year olds by up to 30%, and most of the cuts will come at the expense of two of the most popular options, construction and business administration. Critics of the budget cuts claim that the cuts (aimed mostly at the lower skill Level 2 apprenticeships) will hurt the working class areas of the country the most. More than 55 Labour MPs have spoken out against the cuts, stating that they will certainly derail PM Teresa May’s stated commitment to help the country’s poor. A letter sent to the skills minister Robert Halfon includes the statement; “we fear that the impact of these funding cuts will be devastating in deprived areas, where unemployment rates are already well above the national average, especially amongst young people.” Many in this camp also highlight that the cuts would make it much harder, or even impossible, for the Government to hit their target of 3 million new apprenticeship placements by 2020.
On the other side of the fence are those at the National Audit Office, who are applauding the decision. They believe (along with many others in the industry) that huge numbers of apprenticeships should not be created for the sake of inflating numbers, but should instead be tightly honed to match the specific demands of the country. In a recent report, they claim that there must be, "a clear rationale for how apprenticeships fit into the wider plan for productivity and growth… without this strategic underpinning, there is a clear risk that the drive to deliver greater numbers is delivered at the expense of delivering maximum value." Ultimately, those who espouse this view believe that the Department for Education needs to ensure that the right kinds of apprenticeships are being offered, rather than focusing on increasing the sheer numbers available.
At onlyFE, we are concerned about the proposed Apprenticeship funding cuts. 16 to 18-year-olds and apprentices living in disadvantaged areas seem to be unfairly targeted and we urge that a more in-depth review is carried out to evaluate the full implications/options available. A key issue that has not been addressed is how to get pupils to take on an apprenticeship of greater value to the country. This will require closer links and activities between the Government, training providers, Schools, Colleges and businesses to guide pupils down these paths and effectively promote these courses. This will not be an easy task, and the Government's actions have not inspired confidence that they will be able to deliver it. They need now to get their acts together and step in with a well thought out plan to provide apprenticeships of the highest quality, and ensure the students, who are the next generation of workers, take them up.
No matter which side of the above argument you fall on, it is relieving to know that over 1500 different apprenticeships are still available in over 280 industries throughout the country each year. Ideal for students who have a specific field in mind before they enter further vocational training or attain a university education, an apprenticeship can help a young person build confidence, develop new skills and gain valuable contacts in their chosen field. What’s your take on the controversy over changes to the apprenticeship budget? Have your say in the comment section below.