Show the Working

Reform Post-16 Education and Apprenticeships

Labour · what the evidence says

An independent, source-checked look at Labour’s policy “Reform Post-16 Education and Apprenticeships” — what it would actually do across the things that affect your life. Every claim below quotes the source behind it. How this works.

Prosperity & living standards — Helps

moderate · moderate confidence

This policy tackles a real skills gap and youth inactivity problem with concrete funding and institutional reform, which evidence suggests could raise productivity and living standards — but the effects will take years to materialise and the strategy's coherence is questioned by the IFS.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether Skills England and the reformed levy will translate into genuinely additional skilled workers at scale, or whether implementation gaps and low levy utilisation persist.

Our reading: The policy addresses a well-evidenced structural problem: a large and growing NEET population, a long-term real-terms decline in adult skills spending, low levy utilisation, and declining apprenticeship starts — all documented by independent institutional sources. The mechanisms deployed are concrete rather than merely aspirational: committed funding (£820m for the Youth Guarantee, £800m+ for TECs), an established institutional body (Skills England, operational from June 2025), devolution of 77% of the adult skills budget to combined authorities, and a reformed levy to unlock currently unspent employer funds. These are real instruments, not just soft verbs. The long-term productivity and living standards case is credible: Skills England's own report projects a 1.8-million-worker shortfall in priority sectors over a decade, and the reform directly targets this by expanding training pathways, rebalancing apprenticeships toward entry-level, and aligning FE provision with industry needs. The counterfactual — continued underinvestment, low levy take-up, and rising NEET numbers — is plausibly worse. However, confidence is held at moderate rather than high for three reasons: first, the IFS (an independent institutional source) explicitly questions the White Paper's internal coherence and trade-off resolution; second, the previous levy regime failed to prevent declining starts; and third, the reach of funded programmes (55,000–90,000 young people, 65,000 TEC learners) is modest relative to a NEET cohort approaching one million. Effects are long-term by nature — skills investment typically takes 5–10 years to feed through to productivity and living standards — and near-term gains will be limited to those directly placed through the Youth Guarantee. The direction is 'improves' because the mechanisms are real, the problem is well-evidenced, and the policy moves the key indicators in the right direction, but magnitude is 'moderate' given the scale constraints and IFS coherence concerns.

Good work & fair pay — Helps

moderate · moderate confidence

This policy aims to boost job prospects and pay for young and adult workers by guaranteeing training or employment support, reforming skills funding, and expanding apprenticeships — all of which address real workforce gaps. The main caveat is that delivery is complex and historical spending on adult skills has been cut sharply, so whether the reforms add up to a coherent, funded whole remains uncertain.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether the new institutions (Skills England, TECs, reformed levy) will work together coherently enough to reverse a long-term decline in employer training investment and adult skills spending, given IFS warnings that the proposals lack a clear overall strategy.

Our reading: The policy attacks several well-documented problems in the labour market simultaneously: near-record youth NEET rates, a decade-long collapse in adult skills spending, declining and increasingly top-heavy apprenticeship starts, and persistent employer under-investment in training. Each pillar of the reform is targeted at a real gap. The Youth Guarantee directly addresses youth unemployment and inactivity; the Growth and Skills Levy reform tries to unlock the large share of levy funds currently unspent and redirect resources toward entry-level and younger workers; the Technical Excellence Colleges and Skills England aim to create a more coherent, employer-linked supply of skilled workers in sectors projected to need nearly 1.8 million additional workers over the next decade. The direction is therefore plausibly 'improves' for O4: more young people in employment or training raises employment rates and, over time, wages; better-matched skills provision reduces the mismatch that holds down productivity and pay. The magnitude is moderate rather than major because the IFS flags a lack of coherence in the overall strategy, the historical trend of rising adult skills spending being reversed is not guaranteed, and delivery risks are real — devolution to smaller authorities without commissioning capacity, the modest initial levy flexibility (5–10%), and the track record of the previous levy are all genuine concerns. The time horizon is long-term: institutional reform (Skills England, TECs), cultural change in employer training investment, and closing the NEET gap all take years to materialise in wage and employment data. Confidence is moderate: the direction of intent is clear and grounded in credible evidence of need, but execution uncertainty is high and the IFS warns of strategic incoherence.

Education & opportunity — Helps

moderate · moderate confidence

This policy makes a serious attempt to fix gaps in post-16 education and skills — guaranteeing support for young people not in work or training, reforming the apprenticeship levy, and investing in new technical colleges. The main caveat is that the reforms are wide-ranging but experts question whether they form a coherent strategy, and delivery capacity is unproven.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether Skills England and devolved Combined Authorities have enough commissioning expertise to turn the many overlapping reforms into a coherent system that actually raises attainment and apprenticeship starts.

Our reading: The baseline is poor: a third cut in real adult-skills spending over two decades, falling apprenticeship starts, and nearly a million young people NEET. This policy addresses all three simultaneously — a Youth Guarantee backed by £820m, a reformed levy designed to expand training flexibility and rebalance toward entry-level apprenticeships, new Technical Excellence Colleges with substantial capital investment, and devolved skills funding to Combined Authorities. Each element directly targets a documented gap in O7's indicators (attainment, skills funding, apprenticeship access, and opportunities for disadvantaged young people). The direction of intended effect is clearly positive. The main uncertainty is delivery. The IFS — a credible independent source — flags that the White Paper lacks a coherent connecting strategy and does not resolve key trade-offs. Devolution to Combined Authorities is well advanced (77% of the Adult Skills Fund) but some providers warn that smaller authorities may lack commissioning expertise. The levy's poor utilisation rate (55.5%) suggests the problem is partly one of employer behaviour, which flexibility alone may not fix — as the Fabian Society finding on the previous levy illustrates. That said, the targeted rebalancing toward Level 2 foundation apprenticeships for younger people and restrictions on higher-level levy use directly address the social-mobility critique of the old system. On balance, the scale of investment, the breadth of institutional change, and the explicit targeting of the NEET cohort represent a meaningful improvement over the status quo. The improvements are most likely to materialise in the long term as new institutions bed in; the confidence is moderate because delivery risks are real and the IFS's coherence critique is unresolved.

Compare all parties on prosperity & living standards →Compare all parties on good work & fair pay →Compare all parties on education & opportunity →Open this in the interactive comparison →← Show the Working home