Tout Seul
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- May 2, 2003
- Messages
- 2,628
Apologies for a long post but I am a firm believer in the value of proper apprenticeships. Not only to give kids a chance to gain a long term paying skill and for the benefit of the economy but also as a vital, missing, cog in the assimilation of youth into society. Proper apprenticeships put kids into a position where they learn how to contribute to society, take a pride in themselves and their work, give them a worthwhile target to aim for and provide them with a future.
It would mean far fewer kids contemplating the succession of minimum pay jobs and no progression, ie dead end work or the dole. Reinstatement of effective measures could help to lessen the current decline of those formerly known as the working classes.
The following article considers a House of Lords report that covers the economic benefits to the country. Why the hell do the unions and others supposedly looking to prevent the further growth of the underclass not publicise such a report and use it with their own arguments to get the Government to act?
Our ill-trained youth will kick Britain out of the economic elite
By Liam Halligan, Economics Editor, Sunday Telegraph
Say the word "apprentice" and many of us think of the cheesy reality TV show. But not so long ago becoming an "apprentice" was a source of genuine pride for huge numbers of school leavers. Part-time, on-the-job training was a well-trodden and respectable path - a near-certain route to a secure and fulfilling future.
Last week the House of Lords economic affairs select committee produced a report that deserves attention. This is a highly authoritative body, boasting two former chancellors, some leading industrialists and several world-class economists.
Freed from the party politics that so often crushes Commons committees, their Lordships tell it as it is. Take note, then, that this detailed study is "strongly critical of the UK's training and career development provision for low-skilled young people" and calls for "immediate steps to re-invigorate the apprenticeship system".
This country has a skills problem. For years, our productivity has lagged behind competitors such as France and Germany. One reason is that, while some of our higher education is good, Britain has a disgraceful number of "Neets" - those not in education, employment or training. As the committee points out, no less than a fifth of our 19 to 24-year-olds are languishing in this damaging void.
That's hardly surprising, given that only 50 per cent of 19 to 21-year-olds achieve "Level 2+ qualifications" or higher - five GCSEs or their vocational equivalent (NVQ 2). In Germany the figure is more than 60 per cent, in France more than 70 per cent.
By the age of 33 barely two thirds of Britons have reached this basic level of employability - compared with more than four fifths of the workforce in Europe's other two big economies.
As a country, we are producing an ever-growing mass of workers who are failing to clear a vital skills hurdle. Our inability to develop the potential of millions of our people causes problems that go beyond human misery, sky-high benefit payments and the related social fallout.
For one thing, our skills shortage - by hindering output, in the face of rising demand - generates inflation. That causes interest rates to be relatively higher, restricting growth even more.
As competition hots up, and "emerging giants" such as China and India really get into gear, this country's lack of skills will become extremely serious. The recent Leitch Review into adult training concluded that, unless Britain "doubles skill levels by 2020", we had no hope of remaining a leading global economy.
Part of the problem, as the Lords committee says, is that "many young people leave school without even the basic levels of numeracy and literacy". That's compounded by "the very limited access to apprenticeships - a key weakness in Britain's training regime".
Such placements are "the best route to skills for young people not intending to pursue university education", the committee says, not only in manufacturing but in the ever-expanding services sector too. "But apprenticeships are now desperately needed," says the report, "for the benefit of young people themselves and the long-term wellbeing of the UK economy."
BT, for instance, told the committee it receives around 15,000 applications a year for only 80 apprenticeship places. Compare that with Germany, where around half of all 16 to 24-year-olds will be part of an apprenticeship scheme.
The report points out that our disdain for vocational education is "a long-standing problem". As the committee says, "successive governments have failed to tackle the problem effectively, with numerous announcements and policy initiatives not followed up with delivery".
But their Lordships are "alarmed by gaping holes in the data", by the fact that "no one government agency has ownership of the apprenticeship system" and by the lack of a clearing system to allocate places - "which was announced in 2004 but has failed to materialise".
The report is also "extremely critical of information and guidance being given to youngsters" considering apprenticeships. As one of the report's authors told me: "Many of the schools don't want to know. The Government's targets, and the emphasis on getting everyone to university, mean they don't want pupils even looking at apprenticeships
This is madness. That's why I support the committee's call for all 14-year-olds to be told that, if they apply themselves and reach the required standard, they'll get a guaranteed apprenticeship when they leave school.
For more academic youngsters, such a promise will be irrelevant. But for countless others, it could be a lifeline - inspiring them to achieve just at the time when they might otherwise begin to drift. Such a system will only work, though, if the places available are relevant, of high quality and provide genuine training. And this is where their Lordships really hit home.
Within five years, says the report, all government money for apprenticeships should go directly to employers, a move that would not only increase available placements but make the whole process more useful to all concerned.
If apprenticeship funding - around £3,250 per person per year - was channelled into work-based training, rather than into hopeless state-run schemes, "employers would have an incentive to provide more places, and also to become more actively involved in devising innovative and effective apprenticeships". That makes complete sense.
Ministers say they want such "demand-led" training. But when it comes down to it, Labour's instinct is to protect the public sector's so-called "training providers", at the expense of what employers and apprentices want.
On Friday, the day after the Lords report was published, the Government announced a "rethink" of its plan to give employers control of the national skills training budget because of the risk - wait for it - of "destabilising further education colleges".
This misguided decision was hardly noticed. But it will have terrible implications for the future of numerous youngsters and the future of the British economy.
It would mean far fewer kids contemplating the succession of minimum pay jobs and no progression, ie dead end work or the dole. Reinstatement of effective measures could help to lessen the current decline of those formerly known as the working classes.
The following article considers a House of Lords report that covers the economic benefits to the country. Why the hell do the unions and others supposedly looking to prevent the further growth of the underclass not publicise such a report and use it with their own arguments to get the Government to act?
Our ill-trained youth will kick Britain out of the economic elite
By Liam Halligan, Economics Editor, Sunday Telegraph
Say the word "apprentice" and many of us think of the cheesy reality TV show. But not so long ago becoming an "apprentice" was a source of genuine pride for huge numbers of school leavers. Part-time, on-the-job training was a well-trodden and respectable path - a near-certain route to a secure and fulfilling future.
Last week the House of Lords economic affairs select committee produced a report that deserves attention. This is a highly authoritative body, boasting two former chancellors, some leading industrialists and several world-class economists.
Freed from the party politics that so often crushes Commons committees, their Lordships tell it as it is. Take note, then, that this detailed study is "strongly critical of the UK's training and career development provision for low-skilled young people" and calls for "immediate steps to re-invigorate the apprenticeship system".
This country has a skills problem. For years, our productivity has lagged behind competitors such as France and Germany. One reason is that, while some of our higher education is good, Britain has a disgraceful number of "Neets" - those not in education, employment or training. As the committee points out, no less than a fifth of our 19 to 24-year-olds are languishing in this damaging void.
That's hardly surprising, given that only 50 per cent of 19 to 21-year-olds achieve "Level 2+ qualifications" or higher - five GCSEs or their vocational equivalent (NVQ 2). In Germany the figure is more than 60 per cent, in France more than 70 per cent.
By the age of 33 barely two thirds of Britons have reached this basic level of employability - compared with more than four fifths of the workforce in Europe's other two big economies.
As a country, we are producing an ever-growing mass of workers who are failing to clear a vital skills hurdle. Our inability to develop the potential of millions of our people causes problems that go beyond human misery, sky-high benefit payments and the related social fallout.
For one thing, our skills shortage - by hindering output, in the face of rising demand - generates inflation. That causes interest rates to be relatively higher, restricting growth even more.
As competition hots up, and "emerging giants" such as China and India really get into gear, this country's lack of skills will become extremely serious. The recent Leitch Review into adult training concluded that, unless Britain "doubles skill levels by 2020", we had no hope of remaining a leading global economy.
Part of the problem, as the Lords committee says, is that "many young people leave school without even the basic levels of numeracy and literacy". That's compounded by "the very limited access to apprenticeships - a key weakness in Britain's training regime".
Such placements are "the best route to skills for young people not intending to pursue university education", the committee says, not only in manufacturing but in the ever-expanding services sector too. "But apprenticeships are now desperately needed," says the report, "for the benefit of young people themselves and the long-term wellbeing of the UK economy."
BT, for instance, told the committee it receives around 15,000 applications a year for only 80 apprenticeship places. Compare that with Germany, where around half of all 16 to 24-year-olds will be part of an apprenticeship scheme.
The report points out that our disdain for vocational education is "a long-standing problem". As the committee says, "successive governments have failed to tackle the problem effectively, with numerous announcements and policy initiatives not followed up with delivery".
But their Lordships are "alarmed by gaping holes in the data", by the fact that "no one government agency has ownership of the apprenticeship system" and by the lack of a clearing system to allocate places - "which was announced in 2004 but has failed to materialise".
The report is also "extremely critical of information and guidance being given to youngsters" considering apprenticeships. As one of the report's authors told me: "Many of the schools don't want to know. The Government's targets, and the emphasis on getting everyone to university, mean they don't want pupils even looking at apprenticeships
This is madness. That's why I support the committee's call for all 14-year-olds to be told that, if they apply themselves and reach the required standard, they'll get a guaranteed apprenticeship when they leave school.
For more academic youngsters, such a promise will be irrelevant. But for countless others, it could be a lifeline - inspiring them to achieve just at the time when they might otherwise begin to drift. Such a system will only work, though, if the places available are relevant, of high quality and provide genuine training. And this is where their Lordships really hit home.
Within five years, says the report, all government money for apprenticeships should go directly to employers, a move that would not only increase available placements but make the whole process more useful to all concerned.
If apprenticeship funding - around £3,250 per person per year - was channelled into work-based training, rather than into hopeless state-run schemes, "employers would have an incentive to provide more places, and also to become more actively involved in devising innovative and effective apprenticeships". That makes complete sense.
Ministers say they want such "demand-led" training. But when it comes down to it, Labour's instinct is to protect the public sector's so-called "training providers", at the expense of what employers and apprentices want.
On Friday, the day after the Lords report was published, the Government announced a "rethink" of its plan to give employers control of the national skills training budget because of the risk - wait for it - of "destabilising further education colleges".
This misguided decision was hardly noticed. But it will have terrible implications for the future of numerous youngsters and the future of the British economy.
