Phillipson promises to ‘back the next generation' with training opportunities
Up to 45,000 training places will be funded by hiking the charge paid by employers for bringing in foreign workers by a third.
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.'
The plans for 120,000 training places include an extra 30,000 apprenticeship starts across the current Parliament.
The apprenticeship budget for 2025-26 is more than £3 billion.
From January 2026, funding will be shifted away from masters-level apprenticeships to focus on training at lower levels, although support will be maintained for those aged 16-21 and existing apprentices.
The immigration White Paper published earlier this month set out plans to hike the immigration skills charge by 32% to 'upskill the domestic workforce and reduce reliance on migration'.
As many as one-in-eight 16-24 year-olds are not in education, employment or training.
Sarah Yong, director of policy and public affairs at the 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 Law Society urged the Government to continue to fund masters-level apprenticeships for those aged over 21.
The society's president Richard Atkinson said: 'Level 7 solicitor apprenticeships continue to be the only route outside of university to qualify as a solicitor due to specific qualifications set by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
'Apprenticeships play a vital role in promoting social mobility.'
Shadow education minister Neil O'Brien warned: 'The decision to scrap higher apprenticeships will do damage to the public services, particularly the NHS.
'It will make it impossible for many young people who don't go university to enter the professions.
'Numerous employers and professional bodies have warned about the damage scrapping higher apprenticeships will do, which is why this is being snuck out during recess.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Raising VAT rates would let Rachel Reeves fill budget black hole and enable growth
Tax rises appear increasingly likely. Polly Toynbee discusses some possible tax changes, including VAT (Both left and right agree taxes must rise. Time for Labour to get creative, 12 August). My view is that a 2.5 percentage point rise in the average VAT rate is the most viable option to raise sufficient revenue without reducing growth. Toynbee also discusses possible changes to inheritance tax and the introduction of a wealth tax. These policies may be redistributive but are unlikely to raise substantial revenue. As an example, Norway currently imposes a wealth tax that raises less than 3% of its non-petroleum tax revenue. Given the urgent need for revenue, a VAT raise is likely to be the UK's best option. First, VAT raises significant revenue, at about 17% of total UK tax revenue. This means that a 2.5 percentage point increase may raise as much as £21bn yearly. This is roughly five times more than what it is expected the government will raise from the stricter taxation of non-domiciles. Second, VAT poses limited harm to growth. Since it also applies to people who are outside the labour market, it dampens work incentives less than income taxes do. A VAT rise may partially replace the government's failure to reform disability benefits. In addition, increases in VAT do not reduce incentives to save, as costs go up by the same ratio today and in the future. And third, VAT can be quite progressive. While new savings are unaffected, old savings that people spend in the future are subject to VAT increases. Most importantly, while the VAT rate is flat, using the revenue to support public services disproportionally benefits the poor. This means that raising sufficient revenue may be most important for BergLecturer, Trinity College, University of Cambridge Anent Polly Toynbee's tax suggestions for Labour, if it regains its heart, may I add two. The best taxes not only raise money but also do societal good. So why not use one to address climate, inequity and safety issues, by taxing cars by their weight and annual mileage as reported at the MOT test? Both relate directly to their energy SeatonEmeritus professor of environmental medicine, University of Aberdeen
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Labour MSP defies Scottish Secretary in call for wealth tax
A wealth tax is a form of taxation which is designed to collect money from an individual's total assets as opposed to specific levies on income or property. Proposed wealth taxes have included a levy on cumulative wealth - including everything from property, to investments, to art. The idea of the policy is that it could make the tax system fairer by directly targeting accumulated assets. The policy has recently emerged as a key dividing line in the parliamentary Labour Party in both Westminster and Holyrood. READ MORE: Last week, Scottish Secretary Ian Murray dismissed the idea of the UK Government implementing a wealth tax, saying that there was 'no silver bullet' to the country's economic woes. Speaking to the Comedian Matt Forde at the Edinburgh Fringe, Mr Murray said '[A wealth tax] doesn't work. The Laffer curve [an economic theory which explains the correlation between taxation and government revenue] is there for everyone to see. 'So, yes, you can bring in a wealth tax, because it might make you feel principally better. You might bring in £200 million but the cost of doing that would be huge because there is just flight, whether we like that or not.' Scottish Secretary Ian Murray last week publicly denounced the idea of a wealth tax (Image: PA)Contradicting Mr Murray, Ms Villalba said of the Laffer curve: 'this theory, though influential, is unfounded.' She went on to say that she believes that 'all financial wealth originates from human labour'. 'It would therefore take a mass exodus or nationwide risk to life for wealth creation in a country to cease.' 'We need only look at the hit private profit would have taken during the pandemic had the state not stepped in to shore it up to see the primacy of human labour evidenced. 'A significant proportion of wealth is in immobile assets like land, property and British-based businesses…This wealth cannot up sticks and leave with an individual. The resources remain in the country and are subject to taxation. 'We know we won't lose wealth creation as long as we have a fit and able population to do the work. 'In fact, the greatest risk to wealth is workforce shortages caused by a public health service on its knees, an undervalued public education system and a cost-of-living crisis deterring new parents. In short, the greatest risk to wealth is continuing to let it go untaxed.' The Scottish Greens have also recently made fresh calls for a wealth tax in response to 'soaring' CEO pay. Discussing new figures which showed that some British Executives' pay had reached over 100 times that of the average worker, MSP Maggie Chapman said: 'A wealth tax is now a necessity, to make sure that those who have enriched themselves the most pay their fair share.' Rachel Reeves refused to be drawn on a wealth tax when quizzed by journalists earlier this month. She said the UK Government had to 'get the balance right on taxation' but stressed the 'number one priority' was growing the economy.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Councils spend £1 in every £5 on interest payments
Britain's councils are now spending an average of nearly £1 in every £5 raised in council tax on debt interest payments after borrowing huge sums over the past decade. Local authorities collectively owe at least £148.5 billion, the equivalent of £5,200 for every household in the country, according to the latest official figures. This debt pile has increased 60 per cent since 2015 as councils have struggled with cuts to central government grants and faced increased demands on their services. Many have also borrowed huge sums to invest in commercial property. The real amount councils owe is actually higher because the official figures do not include pension deficits and outstanding liabilities to suppliers, individuals and other public bodies. Freedom of information requests by The Times to every local authority in Britain found that councils spend an average of 18 per cent of the cash they raise in council tax to service the cost of loans. With pension contributions for staff accounting for a further 23 per cent of council tax revenues on average, the typical council is now seeing about £2 in every £5 they raise from residents effectively disappear before a penny is spent on essential services. This makes councils increasingly reliant on other sources of income such as business rates, government grants and fees and charges. The size of debts in some areas has raised concerns about the sustainability of local authority finances. Six councils, including Thurrock and Birmingham, have already declared themselves effectively bankrupt over the past five years, with the Local Government Association warning in October that as many as a quarter of councils are likely to have to apply for a government bailout to stave off bankruptcy in the next two years. The association admits that the growing annual interest bill is adding to councils' financial woes but insists that the lack of proper funding is the principal problem. It estimates that if councils' spending had grown in line with 'inflation, wage growth and demographic and demand drivers' between 2011 and 2023, it would be 42 per cent higher than it is today. Nonetheless, concerns have been raised about the profligacy of some councils. Labour-run Lambeth council, in south London, for example, is paying 51 executives more than £100,000 a year, including a 'director of climate and inclusive growth' on £160,000, despite being more than £1 billion in debt. • Number of council officials on £100k pay deals hits record high In total, the number of council employees earning more than £100,000 jumped by more than a quarter last year to reach a record high of 3,906, including nearly 1,100 who earn more than £150,000 and 250 who earn more than the prime minister. Joanna Marchong, of the TaxPayers' Alliance pressure group, accused some councils of 'years of financial mismanagement'. She said: 'Local authorities have accumulated a substantial debt burden by making risky investments or ploughing money into other imprudent or failed projects, like Birmingham's disastrous IT system or Nottingham's Robin Hood Energy, and now we are seeing the consequences in ever-higher council tax bills for residents. 'Ministers must urgently get a grip on council borrowing and ensure local authorities are operating efficiently, not gambling with taxpayers' money and expecting residents to pick up the tab when things go wrong.' In total, 254 of Britain's 317 councils replied to the requests for information. These showed that the average annual interest bill was £12.8 million, meaning Britain's 317 councils are likely to be paying in excess of £4 billion a year just to service their debts. By comparison, local authorities spend £1.1 billion a year on libraries, culture, heritage and tourism and £2.2 billion on emergency housing. Most of the borrowing is long term and used to fund 'capital projects', such as town centre regeneration and investments in transport, housing and roads, although many local authorities have also borrowed to finance big bets on commercial property, some of which have turned sour. Short-term borrowing is also increasing as councils struggle to find the cash flow to meet the growing demand for spending on special education needs, with more children being diagnosed with conditions such as ADHD and autism. • Wes Streeting pledges to improve special needs school transport Analysis of the debt shows nearly three quarters of the money is owed to central government and a further £10.8 billion is owed to other councils. The data also reveals huge variations in the level of debt and interest paid. Birmingham city council has the biggest debt pile in the country at £3.35 billion – and that is before other liabilities, such as its £434 million pension deficit, are taken into account. • Birmingham council refuses to back down in fight to end bin strikes This huge burden means the authority, which has wasted more than £200 million on the botched implementation of a new IT system, is paying £178.3 million a year in interest. This amounts to 37 per cent of its annual council tax revenue and is the equivalent of £156 for every household in the city. However, 37 local authorities, many of them district councils, have no long-term borrowing at all. Horsham district council in West Sussex, for example, owes no money and paid no interest last year. About a quarter of councils have borrowed to invest in commercial property in an attempt to generate revenue to pay for services but in some cases, the value of these investments have crashed. The tiny Thurrock district council in Essex is paying more than £60 million a year in interest on its debts of £1.24 billion after going on an unprecedented and ill-fated commercial property spending spree. With only 90,500 homes in the borough, that annual interest bill is costing the average household nearly £700 a year and means the equivalent of three quarters of what the council is raising in council tax is spent servicing its debts. So far the council is estimated to have lost at least £275 million on its investments including £188 million on a series of green bonds linked to solar farms. The authority is now being run by government-appointed officials after declaring effective bankruptcy in December 2022 and its former chief financial officer is being investigated for misconduct. However, not all councils' investments have proved so disastrous. Runnymede council, for example, which borrowed hundreds of millions of pounds to invest in commercial property portfolio, spends more than £15 million a year on interest payments, nearly three times what it receives in council tax, but its investments generated £25 million last year. The data reveals that the average interest rate paid by councils is 3.7 per cent. Pete Marland, of the Local Government Association, said: 'Council finances remain in a fragile position, the impact of which has been cumulative for some time. 'The level of borrowing is down to a multitude of factors, the reasons for which vary by the circumstances of each authority. 'A sustainable, long-term financial model for local government must lead to all councils having adequate resources to meet growing cost and demand pressures.'
