Can Skills England really fix our broken skills system?

Is it possible for the new government agency to repair our failing skills system despite the numerous failures of past national skills organizations?

The recent Labour government claims that Skills England will unite the disjointed skills environment of employers, unions, institutions, colleges, and local authorities in order to enhance the country's skills.

You might think you've heard this all before and that's understandable.

Skills England has a wider range of responsibilities compared to the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE). It will focus on aligning skills with the government's industrial strategy and determining which training programs will be funded by the growth and skills levy.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer believes that Skills England will help decrease our need for foreign workers.

However, there is still much that remains unknown. The proposed legislation to establish Skills England, which was mentioned in the King's Speech, is anticipated to be discussed in parliament shortly.

What can Skills England learn from past experiences to make sure it is not just wasting time on a failing skills program?

Get Rid Of The Bureaucracy

Ever since the establishment of the Manpower Services Commission in 1974 to oversee training schemes, Tom Bewick, who is studying the history of skills policies for his upcoming book Skills Policy in Britain, believes that there has always been a powerful, centrally controlled national organization of some kind.

What brought them together, "no matter what the sign on the wall may indicate," was "centralization of the market through bureaucratic means," he explains.

In the 1990s, college principals only had to interact with one quango, the Further Education Funding Council. However, nowadays they are required to work with approximately five different quangos, in addition to the Department for Education.

Bewick believes that Skills England needs to prove that it is not simply an unnecessary addition to an already overwhelmed industry.

Similar to marriages, skill organizations often face challenges after seven years.

According to Lesley Giles, who was hired by the Association of Colleges (AoC) last year to create a plan for a new independent skills organization.

She is well aware of how quickly organizations can come and go, as she has experience working with two agencies created by the previous Labour government: the Sector Skills Development Agency and its successor, the UK Commission for Employment & Skills, where she served as deputy director.

Both organizations did not have a lifespan of more than eight years; IfATE has been in existence for seven years.

Giles thinks that the disappearance of many recent quangos has led to a significant loss of knowledge within institutions. UKCES used to conduct thorough research on the labor market, such as a survey of 91,000 employers in 2015, which is no longer being done.

Sue Pember, who works for the adult education organization HOLEX, was responsible for shutting down multiple government agencies while working as a high-ranking government official during the coalition government.

She remembers how these independent government agencies often strayed from their original purpose. The leaders of these organizations desired to pursue different goals than what they were established for, leading to conflicts with government officials.

She thinks that Skills England should have a clear understanding of how the organization will achieve success from the start to avoid problems later on. Otherwise, the organization will not last long.

Many people are excited about the idea of a skills organization that can shape and implement policies throughout the government.

Lewis Cooper, who is the public affairs and campaigns director at AoC, thinks that the role of Skills England in supporting Labour's goals regarding economic growth and immigration is an important issue of governance. He describes it as complex yet crucial.

He's worried that Skills England might just become another organization under the DfE, without much influence in the government.

In order to prevent this from happening, the new leader of Skills England must have the power to communicate directly with government officials and alert them to potential issues. For instance, they should be able to inform the health secretary if the NHS workforce plan cannot be implemented due to a shortage of college personnel to provide necessary training.

A person with knowledge of the DfE says they are considering giving the new Skills England chief a director-level position instead of a director general. This decision will indicate how much freedom and authority they will have in their role.

High-ranking permanent secretaries from different departments do not typically meet with directors, as they consider them to be of lower rank.

The source thinks that restricting the freedom of the new body could be a planned strategy by government officials. They are concerned that the body might become too powerful and could potentially criticize the Department for Education. Senior government employees would rather keep it under control and limit its influence.

The Department for Education states that the level of importance of the chief's position has not been determined yet.

However, Robert West, who leads the education and skills department at the Confederation of British Industry, ignores these worries.

He thinks that Skills England will have influence by having the secretary of state discuss their skills plans with other government officials and presenting Skills England as a solution to assist them.

There are indications that Skills England will take on a lot of the tasks that the DfE is currently responsible for.

The Division of Future Skills at the Department for Education, established in 2022, has now been moved over to Skills England, along with several other current officials from the Department for Education and the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education.

This concerns Pember. She wonders where they will find new employees with fresh ideas and different work methods if they are only moving existing staff.

Skills England's impact is also restricted by the development of the Labour Market Advisory Board in the Department for Work and Pensions. One of its roles will be to offer advice to the DWP on the implementation of the 'youth guarantee' program, which aims to provide training, apprenticeships, or job assistance to individuals between the ages of 18 and 21.

Additionally, the establishment of a revamped Industrial Strategy Council may encroach on the responsibilities of Skills England in addressing the necessary skills gaps for meeting the government's commitments to increasing house construction and transitioning to green energy. The previous council has been inactive since 2021.

Ben Rowland, who leads the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP), is concerned about the new organizations that have been created to improve coordination across the system. He worries that having three separate bodies could lead to competition instead of cooperation.

According to a source at FE Week, the Department for Education is currently looking to save £1 billion, which could lead to a decrease in the number of employees at Skills England and potentially weaken its independence.

Will it morph into another branch of the DfE's skills department, complete with a Skills England label hanging on the entrance?

They highlighted the varying degrees of independence among different organizations, comparing Ofqual to having arms that are eight miles long and IfATE to having arms that are just eight inches long.

We need to have a serious talk about the extent of its influence. I am hopeful that the plan is for something that can be implemented throughout the government, fosters unity among people, and has the power to determine which economic strategies we support.

Cooper believes that Skills England's main roles should involve gathering information, coordinating efforts, and overseeing operations. This includes providing guidance and collaborating with various government departments, important organizations, and combined authorities led by mayors.

He believes that there is a lack of supervision in the local skills improvement plans. These plans have a role in determining the future skills needs of different areas, but there is not enough oversight to make sure that those gaps are being filled.

Bewick thinks Skills England can help bridge the gap between further education and higher education in the English system. It is yet to be seen how Skills England will work with or challenge the influential higher education regulator, the Office for Students.

Pember believes that Skills England should also involve students in their decision-making process. He emphasizes the importance of engaging with students to keep them motivated, which has been neglected for the past two decades.

The government still hasn't revealed who will be the new chief executive of Skills England.

Giles thinks that it’s important for them to have a good reputation with the business world, but she also cautions that she has witnessed leaders from private companies struggle to understand how the public sector operates.

Bewick says that a senior leadership team will need a mix of academic, government, and business experience.

Cooper thinks that it is important for leaders from various sectors, such as colleges, universities, trade unions, and employers, to be represented on its board. These seats are currently available for interested parties. Cooper believes that by including these leaders, it would support the education secretary Bridget Phillipson's recent statements about improving the government's collaboration with sector leaders. This could potentially change the dynamic of the partnership to be more collaborative rather than directive.

However, civil servants and driven ministers may feel a lot of pressure to act swiftly, which can result in a lack of effective collaboration. This can lead to a big problem if they don't take the time to work closely with the sector.

The CBI recently participated in discussions about Skills England and was reassured that it would not simply be a disguised version of IfATE, according to West. As a result, he is feeling optimistic about the initiative.

However, there is worry among those in the training industry about the lack of discussion regarding what Skills England is responsible for.

According to our informant, the DfE has a set perspective on what the new organization should focus on, and this perspective is largely influenced by the DfE itself.

The Department for Education (DfE) will not be having a formal discussion, but they will be engaging with the industry after Skills England releases their initial report in the fall.

Cooper explains that because of limited government funding, Skills England plays a crucial role in determining where to allocate resources to address the most critical needs.

Rob Nitsch, who used to work as the director of skills delivery at IfATE and is now the chief executive of the Federation of Awarding Bodies, thinks that it would be a big mistake if they don't get rid of the redundancies between IfATE and other organizations like the DfE.

However, Pember believes that the new body is not the main focus and is actually diverting attention away from the real problem of insufficient funding.

We have experienced a significant decrease in funding for adult education, even aside from the challenges we are facing with 16 to 18 year olds. As a result, we do not have sufficient staff to properly educate those who are eager to learn.

Giles thinks that Skills England should take the initiative to determine what the top national skills priorities are, in line with the industrial strategy. They should also consider how these priorities will impact different regions and involve input from various sectors, which is currently missing.

Another individual voiced worry that giving colleges more power could shift the system back to being controlled by the suppliers.

"We tried following that guide before and created a system of talents that didn't provide the necessary skills for the job."

Although there are some concerns, most people feel hopeful about the possibilities of Skills England.

Cooper is optimistic that it will bring about a significant change, even though there are risks of sticking to the same old ways.

Giles wants the organization to remain neutral and not influenced by any specific government, as its tasks will be challenging and time-consuming.

"If you keep shutting down and opening new organizations constantly, things will never truly improve," she cautions.