
‘Covid generation' left behind by Labour's bid to beat worklessness
Those who studied for their A-levels or college qualifications during the first lockdown are now typically 22 or older – but the new jobs guarantee scheme applies only to those aged up to 21.
Stephen Evans, the chief executive of the Learning and Work Institute, a think tank, warned that people who lost out on getting a job because of lockdown are now at risk of missing out again.
He said: 'The Youth Guarantee, which is a good idea, is focused on 18 to 21-year-olds, making sure they get help to find a job or apprenticeship, and actually it really needs to be 16 to 24-year-olds. Your problems don't stop when you turn 22.'
Half of all 22 to 24-year-olds who are not in education, employment, or training – officially known as Neets – have never had a job.
At that point 'it becomes more and more difficult', said Mr Evans.
'Employers look at your CV and see you have no work experience, and you end up at the back of the queue. We need urgent action for that group, not just the 18 to 21-year olds.'
Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, launched the £45m jobseekers scheme at an event in Liverpool, promising to help match young people with jobs or training programmes.
'This is particularly worrying'
It comes as new figures show there are 923,000 people aged 16 to 24 who are Neets. While down from the peak over winter, it is still up from 750,000 before the pandemic, according to the Office for National Statistics.
Almost 500,000 of them are aged between 21 and 24.
Mr Evans said: 'You have got a bit of the pandemic generation coming through here, who had disrupted education and then disrupted transitions into work, and you've got the longer-term decline of people working alongside education as well, the classic Saturday jobs.
'This is particularly worrying.'
In a shift from historical trends, young men are now roughly as likely as young women to be classed as economically inactive Neets – those who are neither in work nor looking for work, nor in education.
In part that is because girls and women tend to leave school, college and university with better grades, while women are less likely now than in the past to care for family members or to look after the home, said Mr Evans.
But there has also been a sharp rise in male inactivity.
As well as the pandemic effect, there has 'been a rise in the number of young men inactive due to long-term sickness, particularly citing mental health conditions', Mr Evans said.
Other government policies are not helping, with the rise in the minimum wage and the increase in employer National Insurance contributions (NICs) proving particularly painful for younger staff.
The threshold at which employer NICs start to be paid was cut last month from a salary of £9,100 to just £5,000, meaning more low-paid and part-time workers' jobs have been dragged into the tax net. This harms employment prospects in industries including retail and hospitality, which often give youngsters their first positions.
Sarah Yong, at the Youth Futures Foundation, said more youngsters are becoming stuck in unemployment.
She said: 'Around one in four unemployed young people who are Neets have been looking for work for over a year, highlighting the persistent nature of this issue.
'Among this group, one in five lack any formal qualifications – double the rate seen across the wider youth population.
'Being out of work and education can have a scarring effect on young people even decades later, impacting their wellbeing, future prospects and much more.
'Aside from the moral imperative to act, there is a clear economic case: if we could put in sustained effort as the Netherlands have done and match their Neet rate, which is the lowest in the OECD, this would be worth £69bn to our economy and would mean approximately 500,000 more young people earning or learning.'
Eight regions in the UK will receive £5m each for the 'trailblazer' jobs and training schemes, which will particularly focus on vulnerable youngsters. This includes those leaving care, of whom 40pc are not in education, employment or training.
Ms Kendall said: 'Every young person should have the chance to thrive. Today's data shows progress, with 64,000 more young people earning or learning. However, there are still nearly 1m young people locked out of the system and being written off.
'I am determined to change that, which is why we are breaking down barriers to opportunity through our Plan for Change by investing £45m in our Youth Guarantee to give every young person the chance to get on in life.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
12 minutes ago
- BBC News
Nigel Farage urges PM to appoint Reform peers to House of Lords
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has called on the prime minister to allow him to appoint peers to the House of Lords. In a letter to Sir Keir Starmer, Farage said he wanted "the democratic disparity" in the upper chamber to be addressed, suggesting it was unfair that parties with fewer MPs were has four MPs in the House of Commons and controls ten councils in England, but currently has no appointments to the Lords are made at the discretion of the prime minister. Downing Street has been approached for comment. The House of Lords is a part of Parliament. It scrutinises the work of government and is independent from the House of Commons, where MPs sit. Members of the Lords are called peers. Like MPs, they scrutinise the work of government and recommend changes to proposed legislation. There are currently more than his letter, Farage said: "My party received over 4.1 million votes at the general election in July 2024. We have since won a large number of seats in local government, led the national opinion polls for many months and won the only by-election of this Parliament."Farage added that he was in favour of reforming the Lords, but that "the time has come to address the democratic disparity that exists in the upper house".He noted that the Green Party, Plaid Cymru and Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) have 13 peers between also pointed out that the Liberal Democrats have 76 peers, despite winning fewer votes than Reform at the previous election. The Lib Dems currently hold 72 seats in the Commons, making them the third largest party after Labour and the Conservatives."None of this holds water any longer given the seismic shifts that have taken place in British politics," Farage said his request to appoint peers was "modest", but did not outline who he would nominate if given the opportunity to do May, Reform made sweeping gains in local elections, as well as winning the Runcorn and Helsby by-election by just six success led Farage to claim that Reform UK was now the main opposition prime minister is under no constitutional obligation to elevate members of opposition parties, but will often ask opposition leaders to nominate individuals for December, Sir Keir appointed 30 new Labour peers, including his former chief of staff Sue Gray. The Conservatives appointed six new peers, while the Liberal Democrats appointed year, MPs backed plans to get rid of hereditary peers from the House of Lords.


Times
an hour ago
- Times
We want to sell our listed house — do we need an EPC?
Q. We want to sell our listed house. The estate agents say we may not need an energy performance certificate (EPC) but should get one anyway. Do we need an EPC for a listed house? A. EPCs record the energy efficiency of buildings, rated from A to G. It is a common misconception that they are not needed for listed properties. It is far more complicated than that. The basic requirements are set out in part 2 of the Energy Performance of Buildings (Certificates and Inspections) (England and Wales) Regulations 2007. Regulation 6 requires a valid EPC to be available whenever a building is to be sold. The maximum penalty for marketing or selling a property without a valid EPC is £5,000, although prosecutions are rare. • Read more expert advice on property, interiors and home improvement Under regulation 5, certain properties are exempt from these requirements, including 'buildings officially protected as part of a designated environment or because of their special architectural or historical merit'. Although this potentially exempts listed buildings and houses in conservation areas, they are only excluded if 'compliance with certain minimum energy performance requirements would unacceptably alter their character or appearance'. For example, government guidance notes that many typical EPC recommendations — such as double glazing, new doors and windows, external wall insulation and external boiler flues — would probably cause unacceptable changes in most historic buildings. This presents a problem in that listed building owners are unlikely to know whether they will need an EPC without first asking an EPC assessor to advise on what energy efficiency measures are needed. Owners may also need to consult with their listed buildings officer to anticipate queries from potential buyers about any advice set out in the EPC. In addition, in December 2024, the government launched a consultation about reforms to the regime, which include proposals to bring all listed buildings within the EPC net. It is probably best to commission an EPC before marketing a listed house, even if it turns out that a valid certificate is not required by legislation. Mark Loveday is a barrister with Tanfield Chambers. Email your questions to


Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
TOM UTLEY: I was once fiercely proud of being a Londoner born and bred. But as Sturgeon seeks greener pastures and after nine years of the Khan Terror, Mrs U and I are thinking the unthinkable...
Blow me down, who would have thought it? Nicola Sturgeon, the nationalist former First Minister of Scotland, who has spent her entire political life fighting for Scottish independence and slagging off evil England, now says she's thinking of leaving her native land. And where does she plan to move to? Unbelievably, her destination of choice appears to be... evil England! More specifically, she hints strongly this week that the ideal place she would like to escape to, at least for a 'wee while', is my own native London – capital of the kingdom she has tirelessly campaigned to leave. 'This may shock many people to hear,' she says, 'but I love London... So, yeah, maybe a bit of time down there. Who knows?' But will she really find the capital as pleasant a place to live as she seems to imagine? Or will she find that in moving from her own party's Scotland to mayor Sir Sadiq Khan 's Labour London, she'll just be swapping one nightmare terror for another? I'll come back to that question in a moment. But first, I'll let Ms Sturgeon explain why she's tempted to move. In an interview to promote her self-justifying, self-pitying new memoir, she tells the BBC: 'I belong to Scotland, it's my home. But I think being physically out of Scotland for a period might just help to reset my perspective and, to be more selfish about it, just remove me a little bit from that goldfish bowl scrutiny that I still live under in Scotland. 'I don't mean that as a complaint, it's just the reality that Scotland's quite a small country, it's quite a small body politic . . . Suffocating is maybe putting it too strongly, but I sometimes feel I can't breathe freely in Scotland.' Of course, Ms Sturgeon will hardly be the first Scot to head south in the hope of breathing more freely. Indeed, my own Scottish mother-in-law made that same move more than six decades ago, taking her five Ayrshire-born daughters with her, including the future Mrs U, who was then only five years old. Like Ms Sturgeon, she had recently separated from her husband – and like her, too, no doubt, she wanted to escape from her tight-knit, gossipy local community, where all her neighbours and relations knew or wanted to know everything that was going on in her life. Mind you, I suspect that the number of Scots who yearn to move south has grown ever greater since Ms Sturgeon's SNP came to power in 2007, and set about turning the country into an oppressive socialist stronghold, in thrall to mad, woke ideas. Thanks largely to England's generosity, we learned this week, every year Scotland now receives nearly £2,700 a head more in public funding than the UK average – an extraordinary £21,192 per person, compared with £18,523 in the kingdom as a whole. Yet in spite of this, Ms Sturgeon's party has managed to wreck Scotland's public services, including an education system that was once the envy of the rest of the UK. In 2006, for example, the nation achieved by far the UK's best results in maths, as measured by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's rankings. By 2022, it had plunged to second worst, a long way behind England and ahead only of Wales. Meanwhile, the number of NHS patients who have to wait more than two years for treatment north of the border is almost 100 times higher than in England, while Scotland still holds the unenviable record of having the highest number of drug deaths in Europe. Indeed, Ms Sturgeon and her party appear to have tested to destruction the theory that the way to solve social problems is to hurl ever greater quantities of other people's money at them. Then there was the debacle over the former First Minister's crazy plan for gender self-recognition, which would have allowed male rapists to serve their time in women's prisons. Add Ms Sturgeon's little local difficulties with her husband and the police, and perhaps it's no wonder that she wants to make herself scarce for a while, away from the scene of all the destruction and chaos her party has wrought. But back to that question: will she really find London any better? If you'd asked me that a few years ago, I would have had no hesitation in saying it was the best place to live on the planet. I was fiercely proud of being one of the few London residents I know who was born and brought up in the capital, while most of my neighbours and colleagues were drawn to it by its job opportunities, innumerable amenities and other attractions. In the words of the wartime song, I used to 'get a funny feeling inside of me/ Just walking up and down/ Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner/ That I love London town.' But I can't say the same any longer. After nine years under Sir Sadiq Khan, in cahoots with my disastrous Labour council, shoplifters and fare dodgers abound, the streets reek of cannabis and deliveries left on my neighbours' doorsteps are stolen within minutes. Yet there's never a copper to be seen, except for those flashing past in their cars, with sirens blaring (perhaps to arrest someone suspected of tweeting something disobliging about Hamas). At the same time, driving and parking in London have become all but impossible for the rest of us, as Khan and his party's councillors carry on their war against motorists, with their Ultra Low Emission Zones, cycle lanes, Controlled Parking Zones, Low Traffic Neighbourhoods – hated by all except eco-zealots. Then there are the endless road closures for minority religious festivals, celebrations of LGBTQ+ Pride, and the like. Since Tony Blair threw open our borders, it has also becoming increasingly rare to hear an English voice on the bus or the Tube, in a city where already 60 per cent of live births are to mothers born outside the UK. Meanwhile, many London schools have become battlegrounds, where teachers face a daily struggle simply to keep their pupils from each other's throats. No, the fact is that the London where I live today has become almost unrecognisable as the city I used to love. Sadly, two of our four London-born sons have already moved to the West Country, driven away from their birthplace by the hope of a better life and the impossibility of finding an affordable home in the capital. A third speaks of moving to Liverpool, and I don't suppose the fourth will remain in London for much longer. Now, for the first time in all these decades, my wife and I are seriously tempted to follow their example. The only question that remains is where, in this benighted kingdom, is the best place for an ageing couple to settle, most untouched by the blight of woke socialism? One thing's for sure. After Ms Sturgeon's long stint in power, not even the beauties of the scenery will tempt us to move to the land of Mrs U's birth.