Skills for Growth: The National Skills Strategy
Lord Mandelson unveiled the National Skills strategy on Wednesday, which is built on three key aims:
- Introducing 35,000 more apprenticeships to create a new class of skilled technicians
- Creating Skills Accounts for everyone, and
- Radically simplifying the skills system
Advanced Apprenticeships
The government plans to enable three quarters of young people to either participate in higher education or complete an advanced apprenticeship (or equivalent technician course) by the age of 30. The guiding principle behind this is a 'bold new ambition' to create a modern class of technicians, which in turn equips young people with skills needed to secure economic growth.
To ensure that this happens, strong pathways into higher education will need to be built for apprentices, along with the reassurance that their qualifications will be recognised in the market place. The government intends to do this by setting up an Apprenticeship Scholarships Fund, with a £1,000 incentive for the 1,000 best qualified apprentices going into higher education. In addition, they will support the introduction of University Technical Colleges, which will focus on the training of these key skills.
The new skills accounts will focus on providing individuals with useful support and access to information that will help them to choose the right vocational courses for them, as opposed to being limited to their local colleges.
The government aims to work with business to help fund areas of the economy that could do most to drive growth and jobs, providing around £100m to support 160,000 training places in specialised areas such as advanced manufacturing, life sciences, engineering, digital media and technology, construction and low carbon energy work.
Simplified skills sector
A large streamlining of the skills sector will also take place, in line with the recent recommendation from the UK Commission for Employment and Skills that the number of separate publicly funded agencies be reduced by over 30. This will include RDAs becoming the lead regional bodies on skills, leading to the abolition of the nine Regional Skills Partnerships, and eventually the nine regional Learning and Skills Councils. The UK Commission has also been asked to work with the 25 Sector Skills Councils to decide how best to reduce the number of organisations.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills argues that this new strategy 'challenges business to invest more, engage more and make the most of the skills of their workforce'. The overall aim is to 'empower the further education system to meet the needs of businesses and learners. That will put further education where it belongs, right at the heart of the knowledge economy, at the heart of our recovery and our future prosperity'.
Announcing this on Wednesday, Lord Mandelson said, 'higher level skills have never been more important to our growth. This strategy marks a radical shift in our skills priorities. It shows how we’ll make sure we’ve got the skills to power the new industries and jobs of the future'.
Cross-party and industry support
Support for the White Paper has come from across the benches, with David Willetts, Shadow Minister for Universities and Skills, saying he welcomed many of the proposals, particularly on the introduction of UCAS points for apprenticeships.
Further support came from the Association of Colleges, whose chief executive, Martin Doel, said they 'welcome the broad direction of travel in this strategy document in a number of areas, particularly the importance it attaches to high-level vocational education and training as an essential element in a vibrant and successful economy'.
Susan Anderson, CBI Director of Education & Skills, felt that the White Paper 'is a step in the right direction [as] improving the skills of the workforce will be critical to the UK’s economic recovery and future growth. There are tough decisions ahead for the Government, but it is right to focus on delivering valuable skills such as science, technology and engineering, and high-skilled apprenticeships'.
She added, 'Business will welcome the attempts to simplify the overly-complex system of organisations delivering skills training and support. The real test for any new system will be whether it delivers the high-quality training and skills that firms and the economy need'.
Quango concern
However this new programme has not been supported by all. Tom Richmond, skills adviser for the Chartered Institute for Personnel Development (CIPD) argued that 'For all the talk of having a 'demand-led' skills system, the Government is clearly more interested in giving extra powers to quangos, government departments and local authorities than it is in giving individuals and employers control of how and where funding is spent'.
He continued, 'In an age when Government spending cuts are almost guaranteed, it is imperative that the collective voices of employers and employees are given more weight rather than allowing quangos to multiply like bunnies and divert precious resources at the same time as pushing employers further away from the decision-making process'.
However, with at least 30 publicly funded bodies being scrapped by the National Skills Strategy, the introduction of Skills Accounts to help provide more individual choice, and general cross-party support, this fear is not widely reflected.

Comments
As much as I enjoyed learning of the Skills For Growth Strategy from Mr Peter Madelson, former EU Trade Commissioner, I don't think that the contents of the weighty document adds anything of substance to our current knowledge of Skills, will add nothing of value to the programmes delivered through Colleges and Universities, and will neither inform nor educate those sections of our society who don't acknowledge the importance of skills in the first place.
It's the last dying throes of a doomed Government pretending to care, pretending to understand the issues, under the leadership of the single worst individual ever to hold the office of Prime Minister in living memory, reverting to type as the nasty, petty, interfering, bureaucracy-loving, class-obsessed political dinsoaurs we always knew they fundamentally were.
Let's hope it's their last dying throes anyway.
Blimey, Raven, don't hold back now. It would be interesting to know what you'd like to see in a skills paper instead?
I've had a bad day.
I'm sorry to hear it. Hope things go better for you soon. In any case, you can always go back and edit posts if you feel differently later. One of the advantages of being logged in.
I'll cheer up immensely once this lot get voted out. In the meantime I'll think of something more constructive to write tomorrow.
Raven, please don't comment. This is not the forum for it. I think the best thing to do is switch your attention to other more apt websites or blogs where your political sniping would be more welcome. Try Guido Fawkes.....
Normally, Raven's comments are fairly constructive. It feels strangely like some government initiative has just wrecked his weekend. I can't think what immediately - is FJF still causing problems?
Incidentally, I remember how everyone (including me) felt about the preceding administration back in 1997, and there are some clear parallels. What do you do once you've built up implacable hostility to both major parties?
Oh deary, deary me whilst any funding is good news, as is scrapping of quangos who are not needed other than to keep more people in jobs? This smells a little of disaster and I agree with the CIPD on this one. The current system of double devolution is a nightmare with local authorities for the most part ill equipped to deal with the issues (sorry) I think more cosy little partnerships will form and the boys club will be rewarded but inovation and real attempts to solve problems will be rejected. However there is a distinct need for alternative suggestions. Employers need to form a group or too thmeselves and im not talking CBI or PPI PFI yyt gggg im talking real employers on the ground in each area. The LAA and LSP were supposed to ahcieve this but ala local uthority arms length was never realy going to work the way it was supposed to WAS IT??
Will the 100million of support include wage subsidies ERM NO ? ERM WHY NOT ? simple employers said thats what they needed most especialy during the slow down so lets completly ignore them and do what we think instead.
I feel much better today, thankyou. I just had a bad Sunday.
Despite my little rant yesterday actually this isn't bad, inasmuch as anything that attempts to make any sort of sense of the unholy mess created by BIS and DCSF of the skills funding flows has got to be a good thing. However giving the lead to RDAs doesn't cut it much for me - not quite sure how this squares with their desire for very localised (local authority level) commissioning; seems once again like having cake and eating it, but spitting the crumbs out all over the table for everyone else to clear up afterwards. It's also very late in the day to be doing this - up until quite recently nobody thought RDAs would play much of a role, now it seems they're leading it. Nobody understood it before and this doesn't help much. That said, in itself this strategy has its merits.
I still have a huge amount of trouble (as does most of DWP it seems) in seeing how Integrating Employment and Skills fits into this though. Who within the labyrinthine layers of skills funding and planning complexity should DWP now be talking to?
Glad to see the comments are a bit more constructive and relevant to the article! On an entirely personal note, I actually think it's a pretty good strategy, and it can surely only be a good move to try and promote choice and give apprentices more of the credibility they quite rightly deserve. Nice to see quite a lot of cross-party consensus on it too, so hopefully it should get passed without too much aggro!
Ahhh Raven, poor soul! If only any of the other lot out there gave me any hope!