With Skills England expected to formally begin operating next
month, a new report from the Higher Education Policy Institute
(HEPI) shows that this government agency is likely to face an
uphill struggle as it seeks to become a credible and respected
organisation both within and outside government. Written by Tom
Richmond, a former government advisor on skills policy, the
report ‘When Skills England calls, will anybody answer
the phone?' finds that Skills England is already facing
significant headwinds before it has officially commenced
operation.
The report identifies a wide range of issues that Skills England
will face as it tries to work with other government departments
and agencies outside of the Department for Education (DfE) where
it is housed. Skills England's new CEO role occupies too junior a
position within the Civil Service to have sufficient visibility
and impact elsewhere in government. That the DfE has repeatedly
talked about Skills England as an internal agency that will
merely ‘inform' and ‘feed into' ministerial decisions about
funding and policy changes has further weakened Skills England's
authority as a source of leadership across government. The
expectation that this new DfE agency will also command the
confidence of seven government departments plus the devolved
administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is
another illustration of how the rhetoric around Skills England
does not match the reality of how it has been established.
The report also highlights a range of contradictions related to
the role of Skills England. The Government's devolution agenda
proposes handing more powers to Strategic Authorities over
funding for skills and training, yet Skills England's focus on 10
‘priority sectors' that are intended to support central
government's Industrial Strategy could cause tensions between
ministers and local Mayors. These tensions may be amplified if
Skills England distributes apprenticeship and non-apprenticeship
funding through the upcoming Growth and Skills Levy in line with
the Industrial Strategy, particularly if Strategic Authorities
are denied funding to pursue their own local priorities. The
decision to task Skills England with promoting partnerships and
collaborations between higher education (HE) and further
education (FE) providers is another possible source of
contention, as Mayors are better placed to drive these changes at
a local level but have not been given any funding to do so.
Tom Richmond, author of the report and former advisor to two
Education Secretaries on skills policy, said:
‘Unless Skills England is given genuine independence from
ministers, it will struggle to gain the trust and confidence of
its most important stakeholders within and outside government.
The decision to put civil servants in charge of this new agency
has weakened its credibility among employers and training
providers, making the policy mountain that Skills England must
climb even steeper.'
‘If Skills England calls, it is not yet clear why any
employer, provider or Strategic Authority would pick up the
phone. Skills England's two most recent predecessors both failed
to last a single decade before being shut down. The evidence in
this report suggests that, from the moment it launches, Skills
England will face a similar battle to be relevant and
respected.'
