Education and Skills Bill

The CBI said in its briefing for noble Lords before Second Reading that it supports the Government’s proposals to raise the participation age as a necessary step to improving attainment and reducing NEETs. It is not fair to say that employers at large are against the Government’s proposals. On the contrary, the CBI has supported the thrust of our policy. Of course, the CBI, like all employers, is concerned to see that we limit to the minimum our bureaucratic impositions. I note that the CBI’s response to the Bill highlighted its concerns that we engage effectively in raising basic educational standards, rightly highlighting literacy and numeracy. Ensuring that the education system attains higher standards and that more young people are employable and better able to take advantage of education and training beyond 16 is a big concern of the Government. Amendment No. 115, tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, would require a review of the Bill’s impact on employers and the employment prospects of young people at intervals. We have made employer duties as light touch as possible and we will not require anything from those employing people part time. The duty to check, which we discussed on an earlier group of amendments, would apply only to 16 to 17 year-old employees who are working for more than 20 hours a week and where accredited training is not being provided by the employer. As regards those employers who have to check whether young people are participating, we are satisfied by the findings of our impact assessment, which show that this will not be a significant burden in either time or cost. Employers ultimately stand to gain from this legislation by getting more skilled candidates who are better able to do their jobs. However, we will continue to assess the implications of our policy in conjunction with other government departments once these provisions come into force. The DCSF already produces a statistical first release each year that provides information on the youth labour market, broken down by various dimensions such as employment, unemployment and inactivity and the education and training status of young people. For the past three years there has also been a more comprehensive review of the youth labour market and its interaction with the education and training market as part of cross-government work with DWP and BERR. There will be a range of analysis on the implementation of raising the participation age and on the youth labour market carried out by my department and other government departments as we move towards 2013 and beyond. We do not believe that it would be appropriate to set this out in primary legislation, although that would encompass many of the objectives outlined by the noble Baroness, Lady Verma. Amendment No. 117 is on consultation with employers. We absolutely agree that it will be crucial for employer groups to be fully consulted and involved as this policy moves towards implementation for it to be a success. We have given commitments to consult employer groups when developing guidance for employers to ensure that it is clear what is expected of them and that the guidance is easy to use and understand. As I said, we will continue to assess the implications of our policy for employers in conjunction with other government departments once these provisions come into force. My department and other government departments already produce information on the youth labour market, which will help us to consider how policy impacts on the labour market as we move towards 2013 and beyond, but we do not believe that it is necessary to set out requirements to keep these matters under review in primary legislation. I hope that with those assurances the noble Baroness will be satisfied that we will monitor the legislation’s impact in a way that she would wish.