Industrial Training Levy (Engineering Construction Industry Training Board) Order 2007

I thank the Minister for his explanation of the changes that are currently being made to the process of approving the two levies. Although the debates approving the continuation of the levies have been useful in the past for highlighting concerns about the provision of training for these skills, we appreciate that the annual confirmation of the levy lays a burden on the affected industries, and we are glad that it will be reduced when the Further Education and Training Bill passes through both Houses. As the Leitch report made clear, we are facing a skills crisis among our workforce that is only going to get worse. Unskilled manufacturing jobs are being lost, and a growing number of skilled jobs are becoming available. The provision of skills training is therefore critical, and is going to become even more so. We cannot rely on skilled immigration, especially as other EU counties start to open their job markets to recent entrants, and nor would we want to. The levies are an important tool in training provision. I am glad that they continue to enjoy the support of the relevant industry federations, but I hope that the decline that was noted last year in the number of firms joining the federations has been reversed. The involvement and support of local employers is necessary to make sure that courses are relevant and rigorous. We are pleased at the decision of the film industry to initiate a levy on its members to finance training for its workforce, and we hope that success there will cause other industries to consider taking the same step. Voluntary levies are a reassuring sign that employers are getting involved in training their workforces. The annual report of the Adult Learning Inspectorate made clear how important that involvement is when it highlighted the failings of the programme-led apprenticeships that remain in the engineering sector. It noted that students coming out of the course without on-the-job experience were unable to handle the tight deadlines and rigorous standards that apply in the workplace. That is why we must increase employer involvement at every level, from strategy and course development at the top to assessment and work experience at the local level. The annual report also highlighted the worrying number of students dropping out of apprenticeships before fully qualifying. Only about half of construction apprentices are successful, and the figures for engineering are not much better. However, those figures are a rapid improvement on past years, so I hope that when we next debate the levies we will be able congratulate the providers on better statistics. Another worrying statistic in the report is the lack of students who progress to level 3 skills; fewer than a third go on to further skills development. The inspectorate raised the possibility that if this state of affairs were to continue, the accepted standard of competency would fall to a level 2 qualification. Many things contribute to the failure to raise the skills level of so many construction workers, including the difficulty of finding funding for those over 19 years old. One of them is certainly the lack of industry incentives to attain higher level qualifications. I hope that the report will motivate a change here and that employers will learn to appreciate the benefits that come from a higher skilled workforce and will continue to support their employees through further training. A lack of level 3 skilled workers will not only cause problems for firms currently looking to hire, but will also cause long-running difficulties in recruiting supervisors, teachers and assessors, with consequences for both training provision and the long-term health of the industry. Notwithstanding all that I have said, we welcome the orders. Despite the problems evident in reports and surveys on the provision of skills training, the sectors are improving, and are doing so rapidly in many cases. We wish them well.