Photo: CEO, Silverstone Communications, Geri Silverstone, Member of Parliament for Bracknell, Peter Swallow MP. (Silverstone Communications)

In conversation with advanced compute specialist at HP, James Quigley, at the recent Get Britain Growing South East conference, Member of Parliament for Bracknell and Education Select Committee member, Peter Swallow MP, set out a vision for a broad, human-centred education system that balances AI and STEM capability with communication, empathy, and adaptability, arguing that the real opportunity lies not in fearing AI but in equipping people to use it well.

Preparing People, Not Just Systems, for an AI Future

James Quigley
Perhaps we can start by grounding this in something tangible. There’s a lot of excitement, and a fair amount of anxiety, about what artificial intelligence (AI) means for education and skills. From your perspective, how should we be thinking about preparing people for a future shaped by AI?

Peter Swallow MP
I think we all know that in a future that will be dominated by AI, the skills to function in the future workforce – and, of course, a lot of that is skills needed to work with AI – are essential. That feels uncontroversial. But I also think it’s really important, actually, that when AI is going to be taking a lot of the weight in lots of roles, we don’t lose sight of the human-centred skills.

AI is never going to be able to replicate the ability to have a conversation, or the ability to have empathy with another person. If anything, I think those things are going to be more important than ever. So, when we’re thinking about the skills we need in an AI future, yes, technology- and science-centred skills absolutely matter, but so too do communication, collaboration, and problem-solving skills – the things that a narrow curriculum can sometimes sideline.

Education as Adaptability, Not Memorisation

James Quigley
That balance between technical capability and human skills feels critical. Does AI pose a threat to more traditional forms of education? Is that something you wanted to pick up here? Do you think the advent of AI is concerning for those more historic forms of education?

Peter Swallow MP
Not really, no – or at least not in the way people sometimes frame it. There’s so much history out there that you can learn now. It’s even easier than just going to Wikipedia and googling it. You can have a whole conversation about something, in much more depth, than was ever possible before.

But that actually reinforces my point. The purpose of education has never been – and should never have been – about teaching people facts alone. It’s not about how much you can tell me about the Battle of 1066 or Thermopylae. The point of education, broadly defined, has always been to give people the skills they need to take on the next problem, apply those skills and solve it.

A Broader Curriculum for an AI Age

James Quigley
So do you see opportunity there, rather than something to be fearful of?

Peter Swallow MP
Very much so. That purpose of education is more important in the age of AI, not less important. I fundamentally believe that government, through the curriculum and assessment review, is looking at a wider curriculum – one that puts more arts and humanities front and centre, alongside much more emphasis on AI and STEM subjects.

People sometimes argue that those things are at odds with each other, but I fundamentally think that’s wrong. The way we make sure we are ready for the next stage is by having that broad curriculum, which allows us to develop the broad set of skills that will be needed in tomorrow’s world.

Adapting Fastest, Not Inventing First

James Quigley
That’s helpful, particularly in the context of what we’ve been hearing today [at the Get Britain Growing South East Conference] about skills pipelines and workforce readiness. From an industry point of view, one concern is whether education systems can adapt quickly enough. How optimistic are you that policy can keep pace?

Peter Swallow MP
I think it has to. If we accept that AI will be embedded across the economy – and I don’t think there’s any serious argument that it won’t be – then the question isn’t whether education changes, but how well and how quickly it does so.

What gives me some optimism is that there is now a much broader recognition that education can’t just be about memorisation or narrow specialism. It has to be about adaptability. And AI, if used properly, can support that rather than undermine it.

Used well, it allows people to explore subjects in more depth, ask better questions and make connections across disciplines. That’s true in schools, universities, and workplaces. The risk isn’t AI itself; the risk is using it badly or not equipping people to use it thoughtfully.

James Quigley
If you connect that back to the wider economic picture, what does this mean for how regions like the South East position themselves?

Peter Swallow MP
On AI, it’s not necessarily the country that invents the technology that wins. It’s the country – or the region – that adapts its economy best to use it. Through skills, training, and employer adoption, the UK is well placed to seize that opportunity.

But that does require leadership. It requires policymakers, employers, and educators to be aligned, and it requires us to think about infrastructure, skills, and community building together, rather than in silos.

James Quigley
That’s a strong note to end on. Thank you.

Final Thought

What emerges most clearly from this conversation is a shared rejection of the idea that AI diminishes the purpose of education. Instead, it sharpens it. Peter Swallow framed AI not as a substitute for human capability, but as a force that makes human judgment, communication, and adaptability more valuable. The discussion moves beyond familiar binaries – technical versus creative, STEM versus humanities – and lands on a more pragmatic viewpoint: the systems and regions that succeed will be those that combine technological fluency with broad, transferable skills.

There is also a notable emphasis on pace and alignment. The question is not whether education and skills systems will change, but whether they can do so quickly and coherently enough to match how AI is embedding itself across the economy. The conversation points to adaptability as the organising principle for the next phase of education and workforce development, with AI acting as an enabler rather than a threat. Taken together, the exchange offers a grounded, policy-relevant case for why skills, leadership, and regional co-ordination – rather than technological novelty alone – will determine who benefits most from the AI.

This conference was sponsored by HP.

Advertorial: This report and event was sponsored by NOCN

The North West stands at a moment of real opportunity. With strong civic leadership, industrial diversity and a growing appetite for innovation, the region has many of the ingredients needed to drive long term growth. Yet one constraint continues to cut across every ambition discussed by policymakers, employers, and educators alike: skills.

At the Get Britain Growing: North West Conference in Liverpool, leaders from local government, business, education, and civil society came together to tackle that challenge head on. Under the theme Building Skills, Building Britain, the Sprint Two workshop focused on a central question: how can the region build a workforce that keeps pace with technological change, supports decarbonisation, and delivers inclusive economic growth?

Participants agreed skills are not a policy add on. They are economic infrastructure – as essential to productivity as transport, energy, or digital connectivity.

Skills as the backbone of regional growth

Across the workshop, participants stressed that growth ultimately depends on people. Businesses may invest in new technologies, but without the right skills in place those investments cannot deliver their full value. At the same time, learners and workers need clear, trusted pathways into meaningful employment.

The problem, participants agreed, is that the current skills system is too fragmented. Funding streams are short term and often tied to qualifications rather than outcomes. Curricula lag behind industry need. Collaboration happens, but too often in silos.

As one participant put it, “Skills planning still operates by sector, by institution, or by geography – but the future workforce cannot be built in isolation.”

The result is a persistent mismatch between what employers need and what learners are taught, particularly in fast moving sectors such as low carbon construction, advanced manufacturing, and digital technology.

Building future skills and reskilling the workforce

Discussions identified two parallel priorities for the region.

The first is building future skills, ensuring that young people entering the workforce are equipped for emerging industries rather than yesterday’s jobs. Participants highlighted how further education curricula often remain rooted in traditional trades, while new roles increasingly demand hybrid skillsets that combine digital, technical, and environmental knowledge.

“Skills are not an adjunct to growth – they are its foundation.”

The second is reskilling and upskilling the existing workforce. As technology reshapes every sector, adults need flexible ways to retrain, transition between roles, and sustain employment over longer working lives. Modular learning, micro credentials, and employer led training were all seen as critical to making lifelong learning a reality rather than a slogan.

Crucially, participants argued that vocational and technical routes must be valued on a par with academic progression. Cultural perceptions continue to undermine apprenticeships and technical training, despite their proven value to employers and individuals alike.

Collaboration as both challenge and solution

While the need for collaboration was widely accepted, the workshop participants were candid about how difficult it can be to achieve in practice. Employers and educators often use the same language to mean different things. Where employers talk about hands on capability, education providers are constrained by qualification frameworks and funding rules.

Small and medium sized enterprises face particular barriers. Many lack the capacity to offer placements or apprenticeships, even though they account for a large share of employment growth. Without practical support, skills policy risks being shaped by the needs of larger organisations alone.

Yet collaboration also emerged as the most powerful lever for change. Participants called for employers and educators to act as equal partners, co designing curricula, sharing facilities, and aligning training with real labour market demand.

Local Chambers of Commerce were highlighted as natural convenors, able to bridge the gap between business need, education provision, and regional strategy.

From ideas to implementation

A defining feature of the sprint methodology is its focus on action. Rather than producing another diagnosis of the problem, participants worked through practical models that could be implemented and scaled.

Among the most compelling proposals was the creation of a ‘Coalition of the Willing’ – a cross-sector alliance of employers, educators, trade bodies, and local authorities committed to delivery rather than discussion.

At the heart of this approach is a Network of Business Clinics, where learners work on real world challenges set by employers. These clinics offer practical experience for students while helping businesses, particularly SMEs, to solve live problems without the burden of formal placements.

Participants also proposed Industry Learning Partnerships, providing ongoing forums for curriculum co design, shared training, and joint investment across administrative boundaries. Alongside this, a Regional Skills Innovation Platform would bring together labour market intelligence, training opportunities, and careers information into a single, trusted hub.

Digital tools, including AI assisted careers guidance, were seen as essential enablers – provided they are implemented transparently and with appropriate safeguards.

“What we need is something tangible and visible – real pathways into opportunity, not just strategies.”

The role of national policy

While much of the focus was rightly on regional action, participants highlighted national policy must provide stability rather than churn. Frequent changes to funding and qualification rules make long-term planning almost impossible.

There were strong calls for Skills England, Local Skills Improvement Plans, and mayoral combined authorities to be better aligned, reducing duplication and competition. Stable, outcome-based funding, clearer national standards in priority sectors and earlier, more realistic careers education were all identified as necessary foundations.

As one participant noted, without consistency at the national level, even the most innovative regional initiatives struggle to scale.

A model the North West can lead

The North West has the leadership, partnerships and civic energy needed to pioneer a more joined up approach to skills.

But success will depend on moving beyond goodwill to shared accountability. Employers must be empowered – and expected – to shape, fund and validate skills. Education providers need the freedom to adapt quickly. And collaboration must be structured, not informal.

If those conditions are met, the region has an opportunity to show how skills policy can be translated into place-based leadership, and how investment in people can deliver growth that is both sustainable and inclusive.

In the words of the workshop’s closing reflection, building skills is not just about filling vacancies. It is about giving people the tools to help build Britain’s future – and ensuring that opportunity grows alongside innovation.

This Sprint Session was sponsored by international charity NOCN which delivers future-fit skills solutions with social impact for Colleges, training providers, employers and individuals.

The initiative, led by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology in partnership with Skills England and a wide range of employers, marks a significant escalation in efforts to prepare the workforce for the rapid spread of AI across the economy. Ministers argue that ensuring people have the skills to work confidently with AI is now as important as previous national drives around digital literacy.

The training offer is designed to be practical and accessible, with short online modules focused on everyday workplace uses of AI. Courses cover areas such as drafting and editing text, generating content, analysing information and automating routine tasks. Some modules can be completed in as little as 20 minutes and are aligned with Skills England’s AI foundation standards. Learners receive a digital badge on completion.

Making AI Work for Britain

Commenting on the launch, Science, Innovation and Technology Secretary, Liz Kendall said the expansion was about ensuring that technological change benefits workers rather than leaving them behind.

She said the Government wants AI to work for Britain, and that means ensuring people can work with AI. While change is inevitable, she argued that the consequences of change are not, stressing that the government intends to protect people from the risks of AI while making sure everyone can share in its benefits. Building skills and confidence, she said, is the starting point.

“AI gives us a unique opportunity to rethink and reinvent how UK businesses will transform and grow. We are on a mission to drive AI adoption by giving people the right skills to take advantage of this technology, enabling them to have a greater impact, faster, which is a truly exciting prospect for the UK workforce and the UK economy more broadly.”

Matt Prebble, Head of Accenture in the UK and Ireland

Alongside the training expansion, the government has also announced the creation of a new AI and the Future of Work Unit. The unit will analyse how AI is affecting jobs and sectors, and advise ministers on how to support workers as roles evolve.

Industry Backing at Scale

A central feature of the programme is the scale of industry involvement. Major employers and technology firms have committed to supporting the training effort, including Accenture, Amazon, Barclays, BT, Google, IBM, Intuit, Microsoft, Sage, Salesforce, SAS, the NHS and techUK.

Industry leaders have framed the initiative as both an economic necessity and a productivity opportunity. Phil Smith, Chair of Skills England, highlighted the pace at which AI is being adopted and the need for trusted, high quality training that employers recognise and value.

Chief Executive of UKAI, Tim Flagg said “UKAI welcomes this expansion of free AI training and the ambition to reach 10 million workers. We have consistently called for a broader approach to AI skills, one that goes beyond just technical skills and focuses on everyday AI skills that empower people, as consumers, citizens, and employees.

“Giving workers practical, accessible skills to use AI confidently at work is essential if adoption is to scale, and deliver real economic and social benefits. This announcement is an important step towards making AI something people can use, not just something that happens to them.”

Accenture’s UK and Ireland leadership described AI as a chance to rethink how British businesses transform and grow, while BT’s chief executive pointed to the importance of combining digital infrastructure with workforce skills. Google Cloud UK emphasised growing demand for hands on digital training, and Microsoft’s UK leadership argued that AI skills are needed now, not in the distant future, if people are to become more effective creators, thinkers and entrepreneurs.

“Everyday AI skills are essential if adoption is to scale and deliver real economic and social benefit.”

Tim Flagg, CEO, UKAI

IBM highlighted its experience delivering free digital education globally and said industry has a responsibility to help close skills gaps as AI becomes embedded across sectors.

Business groups and representative bodies, including the Confederation of British Industry and the Local Government Association, also welcomed the expansion, arguing that accessible skills training is critical to improving productivity, supporting regional growth and strengthening the UK’s competitiveness.

Skills, Productivity and Economic Strategy

The announcement sits within a broader government push to align skills policy with economic strategy. Ministers have repeatedly pointed to low productivity and uneven adoption of new technologies as long-standing challenges for the UK economy.

By offering free, short form AI training to all adults, the Government is seeking to lower the barrier to engagement with new tools, particularly for workers in small businesses, the public sector and non technical roles who might otherwise be left behind.

“AI is reshaping daily life, and all of us need the right skills to make the most of it. BT is doing more than anyone else to build, and connect people to, the next generation networks that will help the UK become an AI leader. We’re proud to be part of this national programme, supporting our colleagues and the businesses we serve to find the right courses through the AI Skills Portal. Upskilling is a major part of how we connect for good – helping more people benefit from a digital world.”

Allison Kirkby, CEO, BT

The emphasis on foundational skills reflects growing recognition that confidence, rather than deep technical expertise, is often the main obstacle preventing people from using AI effectively at work.

What It Means for Workers

For millions of workers, the expanded programme offers a low risk way to build familiarity with AI and understand how it can support day to day tasks. For employers, it promises a more capable workforce able to use AI responsibly to improve efficiency and innovation.

As artificial intelligence continues to reshape jobs and workplaces, the government’s message is clear: AI skills are no longer optional. The challenge now will be turning widespread access to training into meaningful changes in how work is done across the UK economy.

(Picture: Secretary of State Liz Kendall attends the first meeting of the Women in Task Force and speaks to students about what they are learning. Alecsandra Dragoi/DSIT)

The NHS wove its web of care around me. From the get-go, I was supported with compassion, empathy, and world-class treatment by an incredibly dedicated team of doctors, nurses and surgeons tasked with helping me beat the disease. The NHS saved me. They saved me. My gratitude and respect for what they did is limitless. 

For more than 76 years, our national  health service has been saving and supporting all of us – our friends, families and  loved ones – through every life stage. Truly, this organisation  is woven into all our lives and my connection to it feels more  personal than ever. 

The NHS under threat

Healthcare, free at the point of use for all, is one of Britain’s noblest principles, admired around the world. It is an enduring  principle that drives me every day. Yet now, the very idea of  the NHS remaining free at the point of use is under threat.  

Lord Darzi’s 2024 review of the NHS, commissioned by this government, highlighted some shockingly critical problems.  Patient access had deteriorated: waiting lists for hospital,  GP, and mental health services had ballooned. Meanwhile,  A&E delays were posing genuine risks to patient safety.  Resources were poorly allocated: too much being spent on  hospitals, while community care and capital investment had  been woefully neglected, leaving buildings crumbling and  technology languishing in the last century. Productivity was  low despite increasing staff levels, with poor patient flow and  inefficient processes holding back output. Together, these  challenges had left the NHS overstretched, inefficient, and  struggling to meet rising demand. 

“Of course we already knew, before entering government, that business as usual  was not an option” ~ Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Wes Streeting MP.

Lord Darzi’s report simply confirmed the scale and urgency of the task: the “money in, poorer services out” cycle has to end.

10-Year Health Plan

That is why, earlier this year, we launched the most extensive  public engagement on the NHS in a generation, Change  NHS, culminating in the publication of the 10-Year Health Plan (10YHP).  

This is not a short-term sticking plaster, but a long-term  strategy to re-energise the health service. What differentiates  it from past efforts is delivery: the plan is already being  implemented, backed by real funding and structural reform. 

At its core are three “big shifts”: 

• from hospital to community, 

• from analogue to digital, 

• from sickness to prevention. 

These ambitions are not new, but this time they are matched  with the resources, workforce, and accountability needed to  make them real. The first months of implementation have  shown what delivery looks like in practice: 

Funding: an additional £29 billion has been committed in  real terms over the next three years, not just to patch holes,  but to invest in long-term productivity and reform. 

Workforce: over 2,000 extra doctors are already in post, with further expansion underway. 

Thousands of new appointments have been released  through recruitment and smarter scheduling, giving  patients faster access. And now, instead of sending every  patient straight into a hospital queue, more GPs are getting  rapid expert advice from specialists on when referrals are  needed. Hundreds of thousands of people are now avoiding  unnecessary delays and receiving faster treatment closer to  home. The 8am scramble to book GP appointments is over for  many as practices keep online booking systems open outside core surgery hours. 

Cancer and diagnostics: advances in screening and  detection technology are being rolled out nationally, enabling  earlier diagnosis, intervention and better survival rates. 

Med-tech innovation, from AI-assisted imaging to faster  blood tests, is moving from pilot to practice. 

Reducing waiting lists: the backlog is turning a corner.  By expanding capacity, streamlining pathways, and tackling  inefficiencies, we are shortening waits that frustrate patients  and demoralise staff. 

Productivity and efficiency: a determined drive to reduce  agency spend is paying off, with more shifts covered by  permanent staff, stabilising teams and saving money that  can be reinvested in frontline care. 

Indeed, acute trust productivity rose by 2.7 per cent over the past year, higher than our two per cent target.

“Early wins” driving the 10 year plan

Leadership and accountability: for the first time,  underperforming trusts are being named in league tables.  This transparency is driving a culture shift: strong leadership  will be celebrated, while failing institutions are expected to  improve rapidly under clear mandates. 

These early wins demonstrate the plan is not just about  aspiration, it’s about delivery, and it is already changing the patient experience. 

One of the most significant reforms underway is the creation of Neighbourhood Health Centres, integrating GPs, community nurses, mental health professionals, and diagnostic services  under one roof. By offering credible local alternatives, these  centres will, over time, reduce hospital admissions and ease  pressure on acute wards. Crucially, Integrated Care Systems (ICSs)  are being empowered to adapt these models to local needs,  while being held accountable for results. This blend of local flexibility and national rigour is the bedrock of sustainable reform. 

NHS app – a “digital front door”

The NHS App is also evolving into the true “digital front door”  of the service. By 2027, the NHS will have effectively set up  an ‘online hospital’ – NHS Online. This digital innovation will  connect patients to expert clinicians anywhere in England.  Already, thousands of extra appointments have been booked  digitally, saving patients time and reducing administrative  burdens for staff. 

“Perhaps the most profound shift is a renewed focus on prevention” ~ Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Wes Streeting MP.

From reactive to proactive care

For too long, the NHS has been forced into reactive care,  treating illness once it has taken hold. That is changing.  Expanded screening, vaccination campaigns, and proactive  management of chronic conditions are now central to  delivery. These measures are not only cost-effective but  also vital to addressing health inequalities, not least in the  younger generation. That’s why we’ve moved to ban sales of  energy drinks to under 16s, announced restrictions on junk  food TV advertising before the 9pm watershed, and tasked  supermarkets to tackle obesity by setting new standards to  make the average weekly shop healthier.  

Life expectancy still varies dramatically across England. By  embedding prevention into local services, we are beginning  to close the persistent gap in outcomes between wealthy  areas and deprived coastal or rural communities. 

The NHS is being given the clarity it has long lacked. The  new mandate sets sharper performance requirements on  waiting times, GP access, urgent and emergency care, and  cancer diagnosis, with progress published openly. 

Improvement plans are no longer optional. Autonomy is  being earned by results, while decisive interventions are made  where standards are not met. This is how we will make sure  ambition is translated into outcomes for patients. 

Final thought

The 10-Year Health Plan is ambitious, but it is also practical,  realistic, and frontloaded to deliver 

Patients are beginning to see shorter waits and better access.  Staff are benefiting from clearer priorities, stronger support,  and a renewed sense of purpose. This is the NHS we all want. A  modernised national health service, one that is stronger, fairer,  and reflective of our increasingly diverse and complex society. 

By embracing innovation, investing in people, technology,  and prevention, we’re building an NHS fit for the future:  resilient, responsive, and ready to serve the health needs of  this country for generations to come.  

Reeves’ long-awaited and much-anticipated Budget sets out the UK’s economic and fiscal prospects for the period to 2030–31, incorporating new data with the Government’s latest policy measures. The Budget forecasts an average real GDP growth of 1.5 per cent over the projection period; the figure is slightly weaker than anticipated in March 2025 due to a downgrade to forecast productivity growth.  

The repercussions of underperformance and weak recovery 

The Budget now expects underlying productivity to grow at 1 per cent, a drop from 1.3 per cent, a figure reflecting a decade of persistent underperformance and flailing signs of recovery following recent economic shocks. Although real economic growth is weaker, the Budget expects higher near-term nominal wage growth and slightly increased inflation, meaning nominal GDP will fall short of spring forecasts by only about one percentage point. This combination is “more tax rich”, as a greater share of income comes from labour – which is taxed more heavily than corporate profits. 

The impact of inflation 

The Budget’s holistic economic outlook has been moulded by continued inflationary pressures. Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation is expected to average 3.5 per cent in 2025 and 2.5 per cent in 2026, both higher than previously expected, owing to stronger wage settlements and more persistent domestic inflation. Inflation is not expected to return to the Bank of England’s 2 per cent target until 2027, a year later than forecast in March.  

The OBR’s economic forecast: unemployment and earnings 

Low weekly earnings are forecast to grow by around 5 per cent in 2025, before gradually slowing. Unemployment is likely to hover near 5 per cent until 2027, reflecting subdued business confidence and rising inactivity, before falling back to the estimated equilibrium rate of 4 per cent. Real household disposable income growth remains weak, averaging just 0.25 per cent per year, well below historical norms.  

A new tax forecast

On the fiscal side, tax receipts are expected to be £16 billion higher in 2029–30 than in March’s forecast, driven largely by higher earnings and inflation. Income tax, National Insurance contributions, and VAT all rise relative to expectations.  

However, these gains are outweighed by an estimated £22 billion increase in pre-measures public spending by 2029–30. Key drivers include higher welfare spending – particularly disability-related benefits – increased debt interest, and sharply rising local authority expenditure, especially on special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) provision. As a result, baseline borrowing is now £17 billion higher this year and £6 billion higher in 2029–30 than previously forecast.  

Additional spending announced

Reeves’ Budget measures significantly alter the UK’s fiscal profile. Additional spending – particularly the reversal of cuts to winter fuel payments, changes to health-related benefits, and the removal of the Universal Credit two-child limit – adds £11 billion to borrowing by 2029–30.  

Tax rises, however, more than offset these pressures in later years. Freezing personal tax thresholds beyond 2028, aligning National Insurance on salary-sacrificed pension contributions, and increasing taxes on dividends, savings, and property incomes are collectively expected to raise £26 billion per year by 2029–30. The overall tax burden is projected to reach an all-time high of 38 per cent of GDP by 2030–31 – five percentage points higher than before the pandemic.  

Ongoing risks to the Budget’s success 

Borrowing is projected to fall from 4.5 per cent of GDP in 2025–26 to 1.9 per cent by 2030–31. Nevertheless, public sector net debt continues to rise, peaking at 97 per cent of GDP in 2028–29 before easing slightly. The Government meets its fiscal mandate – achieving a current budget balance by 2029–30 – with a margin of £22 billion, though the OBR warns this remains small relative to historical forecast errors and ongoing risks.  

Such risks include uncertainty surrounding productivity growth, interest rate fluctuations, equity market corrections, rising disability caseloads, local authority financial pressures, and uncosted spending commitments in defence and asylum systems.  

Fuel and energy announcements 

Reeves also announced an extra £505m for the Welsh Government over the spending review period. She also confirmed that, from 2028, electric vehicle drivers will face a new per-mile road charge. 

Fuel duty is also set to rise for the first time in 16 years. In the prematurely released Budget document, the OBR said the 5p per litre cut introduced by the Conservative Government in March 2022 would be extended only until September 2026, after which it would be phased out through a staggered increase. 

The Chancellor announced that the Government will end the Energy Company Obligation (ECO) scheme, a programme intended to reduce carbon emissions and support households in fuel poverty. 

Reeves said the scheme currently adds £1.7bn a year to household energy bills, and that 97 per cent of families in fuel poverty have paid more into it than they have benefited from. As a result, she claimed, the Government will remove the charge from April, cutting around £150 from the average household’s annual energy bill. 

Balancing the need to maintain reliable road funding with the goal of encouraging zero-emission transport remains challenging for the Government. The Chancellor’s announcement represents an initial move toward establishing a long-term funding approach that aims to support the upkeep and safety of the road network in the years ahead. 

ISA limit reduction 

Reeves also announced the reduction of the annual cash Individual Savings Account (ISA) limit from £20,000 to £12,000 in today’s Budget, along with an exemption for those over 65 who will be able to continue to save up to £20,000 in cash ISAs. Reeves stated her explicit aim to “reform our ISA system keeping the full £20,000 allowance while designating 8,000 of it exclusively for investment”.

The new limit for the cash ISA limit is expected to encourage over 2 million people to consider investing in the stock market, rather than holding all of their long-term savings in cash where they may be eroded by inflation. While it remains important for individuals to retain some cash savings for emergencies, Labour’s plan here demonstrates their intention to support more people to explore longer-term investment options, strengthening financial resilience and contributing to wider economic activity. 

Attacks from the opposition 

Leader of the Opposition Kemi Badenoch focussed her rebuttal on the disjunct between Labour’s welfare priorities and the Conservative’s heightened focus on employment and getting people into work. She questioned “why anyone should believe anything Reeves says”, insisting that “Labour have lost control of welfare spending”.  

She particularly criticised Labour’s scrapping of the two-child benefit cap, claiming that the Conservative Government implemented the legislation in the first place to encourage people on benefits to spend their money “responsibly”. “People are frightened”, Badenoch insisted, citing the UK’s urgent need to get people “in work”, not merely having money thrown at obfuscatory and misguided “welfare spending”. “This country works when you make the country work for them” – “let’s get the country working again”, she insisted.  

Final thought 

While Reeves insists that her Budget improves the UK’s fiscal position on paper, the OBR’s analysis concludes that the UK’s public finances are set to remain “relatively vulnerable to future shocks”, with debt at historic highs and interest payments consuming a growing share of national income. Disapproval from the opposition, but more importantly resistance from Labour’s own backbenchers, will also be obstacles that will demand parlaying and action in Parliament, because Budget dissenters will have every reason to equivocate, amend and quibble with the Budget to slow its progress. 

There has quite clearly been a shift in the Government’s stance on the ‘B-word’. At last month’s Labour Party Conference, and in recent public statements, ministers have begun explicitly acknowledging the economic damage inflicted by leaving the EU. Until now, the word was used rarely, if ever – a taboo term across Westminster. The Prime Minister, the Chancellor, and virtually the entire political class have long known the damage leaving the European Union has done, but they were hesitant to articulate it for fear of the political fallout.

Brexit: a 4 per cent drop in the UK economy

The Office for Budget Responsibility has been consistent: leaving the EU will reduce the size of the UK economy by around 4 per cent and cut trade intensity by roughly 15 per cent in the long run. These are not abstract academic projections – they mean lost opportunities, higher costs, and real impacts on people’s lives. This is the reality we are living with, and only now is the Government beginning to face up to what the public has known for some time.

This change must be welcomed – but with caution. One reason is obvious: a second ‘B-word’ is looming. The Budget. Rachel Reeves is already laying the groundwork for the tough and unpopular choices she will inevitably announce – and she wants Brexit to take some of the blame.

And rightly so. If you are going to speak of the damage, you must be honest about where the responsibility lies. But it is not acceptable to acknowledge the harm without offering solutions to undo as much of it as we can.

Progress being made with a Brexit “reset”

The Government’s ‘reset’ with the EU is undoubtedly a step forward. The UK–EU Summit last May showed a willingness to move forward together. And for many sectors, progress is being made – albeit too slowly.

An eventual veterinary agreement would remove much of the paperwork and cost associated with trading agri-food with the EU – one of the industry’s greatest demands. Returning to the EU’s internal electricity market would replace the inefficient trading systems we currently have, which are costing hundreds of millions of pounds a year – costs ultimately passed on to consumers. Linking our carbon trading system back to the EU’s – which the UK helped to design – would remove the need for the punishing carbon border taxes on goods traded between the UK and EU, which are due to come in next year.

All of this is welcome. But – and it is a big but – these steps alone will not reverse the long-term damage. They are fine-tuning mechanisms, not economic transformation.

So, what must come next?

First, we need a clear, staged strategy to return the UK to the heart of Europe. At the European Movement, we have long advocated a step-by-step approach – ambitious, deliberate, and honest with the public. We know UK–EU summits will become annual events. They should not be photo opportunities but milestones. Each should deliver specific progress: on market access, smoother trade in goods and services, and sector-by-sector reintegration. We should be thinking not just about the next summit, but the one after that, and the one after that – each taking us closer to where we need to be.

Second, the British public must be able to see and feel the benefits. It is no longer enough to simply promise improved trade. People need to see jobs created, exports growing, household energy bills falling, festivals and sport enriched by easier travel, and professional careers no longer held back by red tape. Unless the gains are visible and tangible, any policy will lack legitimacy.

Third – and most importantly – we must recognise that the most powerful changes lie deeper than incremental fixes. For real, transformational benefit, we must rebuild access to the single market – not just for goods, but for services and people: professionals, artists, musicians, touring performers, universities, and researchers. These human and economic links matter as much as the numbers. And we must work towards a UK–EU customs territory. That does not mean automatically re-joining the Customs Union, but it does mean developing a customs-union-style arrangement.

Final thought: Brexit and the Budget

In short, yes, I welcome the Government’s new honesty about the economic damage of leaving the EU. It is overdue. But if Ministers are serious about that damage, then words are not enough. The Government must be bolder. It needs to go further and faster and not be paralysed by fear of Reform or by those still fighting the battles of 2016. The public are ahead of the politicians on this – they can see the costs in their jobs, their shops, their bills, and their children’s opportunities. So let us tell the truth about where the blame lies – and then have the courage to fix it.

As recently as a few years ago, politicians from both main parties were keen to claim credit for the city’s revival from the 1980s decline. Few do now. Since the council’s effective bankruptcy, enthusiasm for ownership of Birmingham’s trajectory has cooled. How did the city move from a 2022 promise of “a golden age of opportunity” to a Section 114 notice in 2023 – and streets strewn with rubbish in 2025?

Two explanations dominate: Conservative austerity and Labour council mismanagement. To test those claims, we spoke with the council leadership and local-government experts about how Birmingham reached this point and what recovery might require.

Austerity

“You cannot look at what’s happened here in Birmingham without reflecting on the fact that 14 years of austerity took a billion pounds away from this city,” Council Leader, John Cotton, told us. Almost every councillor we interviewed – including some of the sharpest critics of the leadership – made the same point. The National Audit Office has warned that nearly half of all councils face a risk of effective bankruptcy, largely due to funding pressures. As Director of the Institute of Local Government at the University of Birmingham, Dr Jason Lowther put it, “[Bankruptcies] were virtually unheard of before the financial cuts of the 2010s. It’s unlikely local government suddenly forgot how to manage money.”

But treating Birmingham purely as a generic austerity story misses the degree to which it was hit harder than most. While average council funding fell by roughly a quarter between 2011 and 2021, Birmingham’s drop was steeper – more than a third, and even larger per head. Former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak once boasted that reductions were skewed away from wealthier, smaller councils and towards more deprived urban areas. “We had the choice of whether to cut poorer councils the same as richer areas…the Government decided to cut poorer and more deprived areas more,” Dr Lowther said.

Only one councillor we spoke to rejected austerity as a cause. “Cuts to Birmingham’s budget centrally have nothing to do with the crisis. It is entirely self-caused,” argued Conservative councillor, Alex Yip. On one thing, though, opposition figures agreed – mismanagement played a part.

Mismanagement

Six months before the Section 114 notice, a government-commissioned review described a “dysfunctional climate” at the council – “personality-driven factionalism” and weak grip in key areas. Cllr Yip listed hundreds of millions lost across a range of errors. Commissioners later reported a lack of technical capacity in crucial functions, and Labour’s national leadership intervened to resolve internal leadership disputes.

Yet austerity and mismanagement are intertwined. “If the cuts hadn’t happened, would the mismanagement have happened? I don’t know,” said Liberal Democrat Cllr, Izzy Knowles. Birmingham is Europe’s largest local authority, serving around 1.1 million people with a single council – unlike Greater Manchester’s 10 councils or London’s 33. Years of cuts stretched an already huge organisation to breaking point, leaving it less able to meet residents’ needs. Knowles backs decentralising Birmingham’s unusually centralised model – an outlier among developed democracies.

There is a political dimension too. The 1980s collapse of Birmingham’s industrial base under Thatcherism rewired local politics, hollowing out Conservative support for years. After Labour’s long run, a Lib Dem–Conservative coalition took control in the 2000s. Then came the 2010 coalition’s austerity – and voters used local elections to rebuke Westminster, delivering Labour its biggest city-wide swing on record. Since 2012, Labour has dominated, usually holding around two-thirds of seats and double or triple the representation of the next party. “They’ve got a big majority, they can do whatever they want – there’s no challenge to them,” said Lib Dem Cllr Colin Green. Lib Dem Cllr Morriam Jan added that opposition voices often felt ignored.

Where Next?

Birmingham’s politics remain defined by austerity’s legacy. Funding cuts forced service reductions and tax rises. They also entrenched a decade and a half of one-party dominance – a lack of competitive pressure that can dull scrutiny and invite complacency.

What follows is uncertain. Today, Labour, the Conservatives, and the Liberal Democrats hold roughly 98 per cent of seats. In the past, a Labour slump might have implied a return to a Lib Dem–Conservative coalition. That looks less likely now. “Everybody I’ve spoken to thinks Labour’s going to lose a lot of seats – but to everyone else: the Conservatives, the Lib Dems, Reform, the Greens,” said Cllr Green. “We could be in a place where no one has a majority, but no two parties can form a coalition. It could be very interesting for political watchers – but for anyone who actually wants to run the city, next year is going to be a nightmare.”

Birmingham’s future is therefore open. The blame is shared – sustained underfunding, organisational failures, and a political culture shaped by national battles. But next May offers voters a choice. Whatever the outcome, the people of Birmingham will have the chance to decide the city’s next chapter – and whether its government can once again be a source of pride rather than decline.

Photo Credit: Reel News

Why the UK must lead in technology

Reflecting on his time at the Treasury, Hunt described how he was struck by the sheer scale and diversity of the UK’s tech ecosystem, now valued at over £1 trillion and ranked third in the world behind only the United States and China.

‘We don’t talk about it very much because there aren’t many famous British tech names’, he admitted, but our technological ecosystem, to him, is both ‘exciting’ and ‘extraordinary’. Hunt cited Great Britain’s globally-leading universities (‘We’ve got the London, Oxford, Cambridge triangle’), and that outside the US, the UK is ‘the world’s biggest financial services sector’. He celebrated the ‘great’ spin-offs, science parks and tech parks owned by our universities – ‘every bit as good as what happens at Stanford and the Ivy Leagues’.

Hunt first announced his UK Silicon Valley ambition during his 2022 Autumn Statement, a period he described as ‘a pretty horrible moment’ for the economy. Despite the difficult context of rising energy prices and fiscal tightening, he said the idea was met not with ridicule but with recognition: ‘no one laughed. People understood we’ve got something going for us’. The former Chancellor believes the UK’s strengths in artificial intelligence, defence, and scientific innovation will underpin the country’s long-term economic growth.

‘My definition of great is very simple. It’s a country that can shape the world as well as be shaped by it’.

How to Power Growth

Hunt said the UK’s ambition to rival the US and China in technology depends on keeping British start-ups in the UK once they are successful and developed: ‘we’ve got to create an infrastructure where homegrown companies can IPO in the UK without having to go to NASDAQ or elsewhere once they hit unicorn status’. He claimed that British pension funds currently work at loggerheads to growth, rarely investing in domestic innovation, as opposed to other countries: ‘In the US, Canada and Australia, if you do an IPO, you can be confident that domestic pension funds will pour in. In the UK, less than 4% of their holdings are UK-based’.

He insisted that as a result, ‘North Americans are making more money out of our great hopes for the future than Brits are’, noting that 45% of British venture capital funding comes from North American pension funds, compared to just 3% from British ones.

Hunt also warned that energy prices could become a critical barrier to AI development and data-driven industries. ‘We have the highest energy costs in Europe. By 2034, data centres will use more electricity than the entire Indian economy. We’ve got to sort out our energy prices – they’re just too high’. Lower energy costs, he argued, are essential not only for competitiveness but also for the UK’s ambition to be a leader in AI infrastructure.

‘No one laughed. People understood we’ve got something going for us’.

Reforming the NHS

Jeremy Hunt’s belief that structural NHS reform is vital to accelerating technological adoption; that it is evidence of national greatness, the ‘most centralised health system in the world’, but challenged with healthcare innovation.

Hunt argued that excessive central control has made the system risk-averse and slow to adopt innovation. He called for decentralisation, giving more autonomy to hospitals and local health trusts; akin to the reforms that improved state schools over the past two decades: ‘when we gave headteachers power over budgets and accountability, we saw English schools become the best in the Western world. There’s no reason the NHS can’t do the same’.

He said decentralisation would not only reduce bureaucracy but also empower NHS leaders to partner more effectively with start-ups in diagnostics, predictive analytics and drug discovery. He insisted that were he to repeat his time as Health Secretary, he would have scrapped national targets, criticising them for making the system ‘too cumbersome and bureaucratic’.

AI Regulation

Hunt also addressed the UK’s position between the EU’s heavily regulated model and the US’s laissez-faire approach to artificial intelligence. He expressed his support for the US model: one of minimising regulation, ‘but being prepared to clear up the mess if there is one’.

Hunt clearly feels that Europe’s restrictive approach risks stifling innovation: ‘The EU asks, ‘Why don’t we have a Google or Microsoft?’ You’ll never get one with that kind of heavy-handed regulation’. But he did praise the UK’s tradition of independent, pragmatic regulation, noting that the country has led on digital safety and transparency, including age verification laws. He emphasised that it is most important to ‘keep regulators independent and responsive’.

The Politics of Optimism

Throughout the discussion, Hunt’s emphasis consistently rested on matters of national confidence. From the tech sector to health and regulation, he argued that the UK already has the talent, institutions and industrial base to compete globally, but that structural reform and investment are needed to unlock its full potential.

Hunt cited Donald Trump’s social media strategy as a positive harbinger of ‘this new world we’re in’ – that the US president seems able to tap into the public psyche, giving him a ‘unique ability to both listen and communicate’. His ability to do so, Hunt argues, rests on his spending three hours every day posting online – something that, Hunt feels, in British politics, should be ‘prioritised’.

In a political climate often defined by pessimism, Hunt clearly seeks to be a voice of pragmatic optimism: that Great Britain is indeed great, already equipped with the tools, the talent, and the institutions it needs to thrive – it simply needs the courage to use them. The question remains to be seen whether a public who have withstood so much pessimism will treat such optimism with cynicism, or support.

Strategic Economic Development in the Northwest 

Aphra Brandreth opened discussions on Strategic Economic Development in the Northwest by celebrating the North West’s immense contribution to the sector: ‘we are […] the third biggest contributor to the UK’s defence industry. And what we contribute is more than the Welsh and Scottish defence industries put together’. Combined with sheer statistical power (49,000 jobs and 128 ‘really important companies’), to Brandreth, is the ‘big heritage’ of the North West’s long history of defence production.  

From heritage shipbuilding at Cammell Laird to the nuclear submarine programme in Cumbria, the defence sector anchors regional prosperity and national security. She discussed the need for a coordinated strategy between technology and defence, bringing advanced manufacturing, supply chain, economy and AI together to put forward a coherent case to government to secure investment. Brandreth is keen to conjoin existing industrial forces with burgeoning innovation strategies, to ward off stagnation or arrested growth.  

Infrastructure, Housing, and Connectivity 

Councillor Judith Derbyshire drew the oft-cited comparison between growth constraint and poor connectivity and infrastructure, including limited broadband access and weak transport links. She explained the importance of upgrading the A66 and A590, electrifying the North Wales main line, and improving links between Southport, Cumbria, and Merseyside. 

Inextricably connected, of course, is housing. Derbyshire highlighted the challenge of ‘social rented housing, especially in Central Lake District’ – a marked struggle due to high numbers of ‘important but low wage jobs working in the hospitality, tourism industry’, without the infrastructure to house employees. Local initiatives such as Barrow Rising and Marina Village, she explained, are repurposing brownfield land and bringing empty homes back into use, while tackling the impact of second homes and energy inefficiency on communities and affordability. 

Skills, AI, and Future Workforce Growth

Laura Randall from NOCN described the coordinated regional Skills Compact, which has been proposed to connect employers, training providers, and awarding bodies. The other participants celebrated this, calling for flexible, inclusive qualifications that address real-world gaps and embed transferable skills such as digital literacy, sustainability, and problem-solving. 

Randall celebrated the major opportunities for productivity and public service transformation afforded by AI and digital innovation. But she also called for clearer pathways, improved practical training, and greater public and institutional confidence to adopt these technologies responsibly: ‘it’s about future proofing really, rather than just developing qualifications for now. We’ve got to be thinking more into the future’.  

Local Procurement and Economic Inclusion 

Aphra Brandreth explained the advantage of local procurement (encouraging sourcing and supply from local businesses), to generate growth for smaller businesses. She insisted that they need ‘security […] so they can scale up and grow’: ‘supporting them to become the big businesses of tomorrow is really vital’. Collaboration between councils, businesses, and anchor institutions will be key to unlocking this potential. 

Devolution and Collaboration 

Devolution was largely welcomed as an opportunity to align decision-making with local priorities, but Brandreth raised concerns about the risk of added bureaucracy: ‘the devolution piece I’m slightly staying out of […] I do have some concerns about whether you’re just going to end up with an extra layer of government’. She explained that collaboration and devolution need to ‘really champion an area’, and not just ‘end up costing a lot of money and not delivering the actual outfits that we really want’. Participants called for greater cross-council collaboration, particularly between mayors across the political spectrum, to accelerate progress on transport, housing, and economic strategy. 

Ultimately, the panellists agreed, if Britain is to grow, it will start in places like the North West, where innovation meets industry, and collaboration drives change. The challenge now is to turn strategy into delivery, ambition into action and promises into real, experienced, growth.

The review examined delivery of all 50 of the Action Plan’s recommendations, all of which were accepted by the Government in their official response to the Plan. 

The third of a series of panels was titled: “What Are the Opportunities Today?” and was Chaired by Baroness Thangam Debonnaire. Joining Baroness Thangam on the panel were Indra Joshi (Director of Strategic Engagement at OptumUK), Alex Ktorides of Bristows, Alex Kirkhope (Partner at Shoosmiths), Ed de Minckwitz (Director of Public Policy at ServiceNow UK and Elizabeth Seger (Associate Director of Digital Policy at Demos).

Where are we now – and where should we be?

Baroness Thangam Debbonaire opened the session by referencing earlier discussions on competitiveness, regulation, and whether government is aligned with public expectations. She asked the panel to introduce themselves and answer: where do you think we’ll be in six months or two years, and where would you like us to be?

Elizabeth Seger, Director of Digital Policy at Demos, noted that while policy is slow, AI is fast, and AI is already hitting the ground. She said: “Where will we be in six months? Policy is slow. AI is fast. But AI is hitting the ground, people are starting to experience it in daily life: in transportation, government services, even politics.”

Ed de Minckwitz, Director of Public Policy at ServiceNow, said he hoped to see the ambitions of the AI Action Plan put into practice. He described the gap between frontier innovation and public sector adoption, and said applying private sector use cases to political pain points would make a visible difference to citizens.

How do we raise political literacy?

Next, Baroness Debbonaire asked another question: how do we get politicians to understand AI better – and bring the public with them?

Elizabeth Seger described one effort carried out by Demos. First, a six month scheme to educate MPs about AI: “We just ran a six-month AI parliamentary scheme to educate MPs: about how AI works, what data it uses, what the risks are. No policy agenda, just education. And yes, there were “no stupid questions” moments.”

Following Seger’s comments, Dr Indra Joshi explained that policymakers often fall foul of common misconceptions regarding AI: “It’s about education. Policymakers hear “AI in healthcare” and think of Google or ChatGPT. But that’s a narrow slice of what’s possible. We’ve also overhyped AI. It’s not going to magically solve everything. And some of the things the public want, like joined-up services, aren’t even about AI. They’re about better data integration, APIs, and governance.”

Ed de Minckwitz argued that there is significant misalignment between industry and policymaker. He explained that industry does, and asks Government to figure out how that can fit into the wider picture. Government, he argued, wants solutions to its own specific problems – with those being, more often than not, completely different to industry priorities.

How do you pitch AI to the public?

The conversation then turned to methods that can be used to get members of the public “excited” by AI, with Alex Ktorides highlighting how AI can empower people: by boosting skills and opening new work opportunities.

Baroness Thangam then pressed the panel for concrete examples, saying: “My mum wouldn’t be convinced. She wants concrete examples,” to which Elizabeth Seger replied: “Then tell her: AI is already messing with her life.

It’s deciding what she sees online. It shapes her search results. It can introduce bias, manipulate, deceive. And there’s no clear liability framework”

Seger argued for distributed accountability “because product liability laws don’t work when anyone can download and run AI”. She then further urged: “The UK has a shot at becoming a hub for AI assurance. Let’s leverage that.”

What do you want to see in two years time?

Baroness Debbonaire closed the session by asking the panel what one thing they want us to be doing differently in two years, and how the room could help.

Ed de Minckwitz said the Action Plan recognises how hard this is, and called for radical change to procurement and new partnerships between government and industry.

Alex Ktorides said liability is key. He described AI systems as layered and complex, and said that if the UK can lead on trustworthy legal frameworks, it could become a global hub.

Elizabeth Seger gave three points: solve liability, stop fighting the AI safety agenda and monetise it, and build AI sovereignty through collaboration. She said the UK can’t compete with the US alone and needs shared data, public AI infrastructure, and open-source partnerships.

Dr Indra Joshi said that in healthcare, liability falls on clinicians regardless of the tech, and that this needs to change. She added that responsibility can’t be pushed onto frontline workers just because systems haven’t evolved.

Baroness Debbonaire ended the panel by saying: “Let’s figure out where we still need humans. Jobs aren’t just going away. Creativity is something we can all enjoy more, if we build regulation that protects creators. And I’m speciesist. I want humans to have a future with AI. I believe it’s possible, and it’s people in this room who can help us get there.”

The funding will be used to start new Technical Excellence Colleges to provide additional training to skilled professionals in areas that “local economies need” like AI and IT systems.

The funding is expected to support the training of thousands of new engineers, programmers and IT technicians by 2029.

It forms part of the government’s ambition to reduce the number of people not in education, employment or training (NEETs), and to reduce domestic skill gaps.

Currently, one in seven young people are classified as NEETs, while the number of people enrolled on apprenticeships has fallen by almost one fifth between 2016/17 and 2023/24.

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: “To make Britain the best place in the world to do business, we also need the best workforce in the world with the right skills and expertise to thrive.

“Our modern Industrial Strategy will be powered by investing in British people. It will help transform our skills system to end the overreliance on foreign labour, and ensure British workers can secure good, well-paid jobs in the industries of tomorrow and drive growth and investment right across the country.

“Where past governments have watched from the sidelines as British industry has faced under-investment and opportunities have been shipped overseas, this government is leading the way, and our modern Industrial Strategy is a downpayment on a decade of renewal.”

Earlier this month an overhaul of the apprenticeship system was announced with the aim of bringing more school leavers and young people into essential trades and growth sectors.

The plan has however been criticised for removing funding for higher level apprenticeships (level 7), making it harder for university educated workers to transition into the workforce.

Extra funding for the tech sector was also made available as part of the skills drive, with £187 million being invested into the TechFirst programme, expanding the range and quality of tech teaching across secondary schools, university and within companies.

These tech initiatives are designed to prepare all generations for an AI driven future, aiming to provide 7.5 million workers with AI skills by 2030.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said: “Skills rightly run right through the heart of this Industrial Strategy because they are key to breaking the link between background and success for young people and delivering prosperity for our country.

“Our commitment to growing the economy and delivering for people across the country is backed up with real investment, getting thousands of our young people on to courses and into jobs.

“This package builds on the reforms we have already made, slashing red tape and boosting funding to get businesses to invest in homegrown talent, with more people in skilled work and driving Britain forward again.” 

The Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, will launch the full Industry Strategy on Monday as part of the government’s 10 year plan for national renewal. Later in the week a new Trade Strategy will be announced, impacting how the UK approaches trade barriers and international supply chains.

Featured image via Martin Suker / Shutterstock.

Construction, health and social care, engineering and the digital sector are among those set to benefit the most from the new opportunities.

The budget for investment in foundation apprenticeships has also exceeded £3 billion for the first time, with £250 million of additional funding earmarked for skills bootcamps and technical college programmes in a variety of sectors.

This includes £14 million of funding to support adult education to mayoral authorities to support up to 5,000 new learners, £100 million for construction skills bootcamps and £136 million for bootcamps in other priority sectors.

The government has also promised £160 million of investment in further education providers this year to enable the recruitment of specialist teachers.

The announcement comes following data from the ONS showing that one in eight 18 to 24 year olds in some areas are classed as NEET’s, those not in employment, education or training, and that there has been a significant drop off in the number of apprentices over the last decade.

To combat the rise in NEET’s, the government will also refocus resources away from Level 7 (higher or masters-level) apprenticeships in favour of positions for younger people, where they argue the funding will have the greatest impact.

In response, Shadow Education Minister Neil O’Brien criticised the decision to reprioritise foundation over higher apprenticeships, arguing this will compound damage to employers already done by the increase in national insurance.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said: “A skilled workforce is the key to steering the economy forward, and today we’re backing the next generation by giving young people more opportunities to learn a trade, earn a wage and achieve and thrive. 

“When we invest in skills for young people, we invest in a shared, stronger economic future – creating opportunities as part of our Plan for Change.

“But everyone has a role to play in a thriving economy, and we’re taking our responsibility seriously providing more routes into employment, it’s now the responsibility of young people to take them.”

Many organisations have responded positively to the announcement. Milton Walcott, HSEQ Manager at construction company Complete Fixing Solutions Ltd said: “I am excited to see the government’s focus on expanding apprenticeships and skills training for young people. 

“The introduction of Foundation Apprenticeships is a great step forward in helping young people build the skills they need for the future.”

Sarah Yong, Director of Policy and Public Affairs at Youth Futures Foundation said: “International evidence shows apprenticeships are a highly impactful way to support young people to prepare for and access jobs, yet participation among under-25s, especially the most marginalised, has declined in recent years.

“With stubbornly high youth unemployment and inactivity, rebalancing the apprenticeship system can encourage investment in youth apprenticeships and is a first step in enabling more young people to access good work.”

The new investment comes after the government announced a 32 per cent increase in the Immigration Skills Charge, a fee paid by sponsors when they give sponsorships to migrants applying for visas to work in the UK.

The government intends for this to reduce employer reliance on migrant workers in priority sectors, instead improving the skills of the domestic workforce as outlined in the recent Immigration White Paper.

However, concerns have been raised about the potential for this change in approach to make recruitment harder in sectors with a large proportion of workers from overseas such as health and social care.

Responding to the Immigration White Paper, Chief Executive of NHS Employers Danny Mortimer said: “Social care and health leaders will be concerned about the risk that these proposed changes to immigration rules pose to vital social care provision. 

“International workers play a crucial role in delivering these important services across the country.”

Featured image via Lauren Hurley / No10 on Flickr.

Author: Angus Coleman.