UK Parliament / Open data

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

I, too, thank the Minister for introducing the two orders. We have them every year, and every year we on these Benches reiterate that we support them. In this case, I have no wish to depart from that tradition. The industry is distinguished by consisting of a small number of very large organisations and a large number of very small ones, and a great deal of contracting out. Those arrangements ensure that very few organisations can get away with being freeloaders in terms of training and paying for it. I have two concerns, both of which have been alluded to by the noble Baroness, Lady Morris of Bolton. The first is the validity of the consultation in the case of the engineering construction order. Although the consultation took place and the proposals were supported by the main employer organisations, they now represent less than half of the employers. I noted that last year the percentage dropped from 58 to 50 per cent, and this year it has gone down to 48 per cent. Clearly, it is a continuing trend. I wonder what the Government do to get the views of the other organisations, which do not belong to the federations, and which are not consulted on these matters. In view of the fact that 83 per cent of the total levy is likely to be paid by those who did respond to the consultation, we cannot say that the consultation was totally invalid, but it is worrying. The second issue is the number of apprenticeships that are not completed. I know that it is the industry’s view that a full, proper apprenticeship is up to an NVQ level 3. Yet, a large number of apprentices either stop at level 2 or do not even get that far. That is particularly worrying. I think that it has something to do with the fact that the Learning and Skills Council funds up to the age of 19. Many of them have only got as far as level 2 at that stage, and do not go on to level 3 because the funding is not available and employers are not willing to spend the money on it. In the light of the Government’s proposals following the Leitch report, and the Further Education and Training Bill that is currently before your Lordships’ House, can the Minister draw our attention to anything that is likely to improve that situation because it is vital that young people improve their skills in those two important industries? Last year, when these orders were before us my noble friend Lady Sharp, who is not in her place today, made two suggestions. One was that part of the problem is the difficulty of getting work placements from small and medium-sized businesses. She suggested that the Government might consider giving some incentives to small and medium-sized businesses to offer these important placements where young people could get experience. I do not believe that the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Oldham, responded to that point on that occasion. I do not know whether the noble Lord, Lord Adonis, can reassure us that something is being done to encourage the smaller firms to provide those important training places. The Government are large commissioners of building and construction projects. My noble friend Lady Sharp suggested that perhaps the Government would give some consideration to making it a stipulation of the contracts that apprentices should be properly qualified if they are to work on contracts. I think of the Building Schools For The Future programme as one example of where that might be done. The response of the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Oldham, at that time was that those things are very competititve and it would put the price up. We all want high quality work, and at the same time we want to develop the skills of our young people. The Government are in a position to do something about that. I wonder whether the Minister has a different view from his colleague, or whether the situation has moved on, because the Government are now focusing much more on the important area of developing the skills of the young people of this country, and they might consider using their leverage in whatever way they can to ensure that is done. Those are my two areas of concern. I hope that the Minister can reassure me on them.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

689 c100-1GC 

Session

2006-07

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top