Lifelong Learning: “University of the Air” White Paper

[Sir Desmond Swayne in the Chair]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the impact of the University of the Air White Paper on lifelong learning opportunities.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I am grateful for the opportunity to lead this debate marking the 60th anniversary of the White Paper that led to the founding of the Open University, originally called the “University of the Air”. It is worth pausing on that phrase for a moment, because 60 years later it still sounds faintly otherworldly, even with all our electronic gizmos and gadgets and the information whizzing around us constantly. A “University of the Air” meant higher education broadcast directly into people’s homes. It meant learning being made available not just to those who had always had privilege, not just to the young or the affluent, and not only to those who followed a conventional academic route, but, crucially, to ordinary working people fitting study around jobs, families and the realities of their lives.

Sixty years on, what once sounded ambitious, perhaps even eccentric to some, instead now looks visionary. That is because it was visionary. It did not begin as some sort of administrative reform dreamt up in Whitehall; first and foremost, it was a political project. Harold Wilson first floated the idea in 1963, after seeing the potential of television and broadcasting to widen access to education in ways that had not previously seemed possible. But the person who really drove the project forward was his Minister, Jennie Lee.

There are not many White Papers that leave behind institutions that still change lives six decades later, but this one did, because Jennie Lee understood something important: there has always been a mismatch in this country—potential is spread far more widely and far more equally than opportunity. In the mid-60s, the assumption was still that higher education belonged to a relatively narrow section of society.

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing the debate. On the narrow cohort of people who normally benefit from higher education, does he agree that lifelong learning is an essential component for young people from working-class communities in particular? Many of them do not take part in traditional higher education, and they can and should be targeted so that we benefit not just now but for generations to come.

I agree entirely, and will make similar points later in my speech. The hon. Gentleman and I are very much on the same page.

Will the hon. Gentleman join me in recognising the Open University’s role in pioneering modules, credits and credit transfers, which turned lifelong learning into a reality for so many adults in my constituency? Does he agree that the funding changes in 2010 badly hit part-time and mature learners, and that the promise of the White Paper still depends on the choices that Governments make on funding policies?

Funding is a huge issue here. The modular basis for the Open University has been a real boon to people who find themselves unable, for whatever reason, to study in a traditional format, but funding is still a key concern.

Back in the ’60s, university was for young people. It was thought to be for young people, usually at least middle class, studying full time and following a fairly prescribed path. The thinking went that if someone missed their opportunity at 18 or 21, that was that—they had had their chance. But Jennie Lee and the Wilson Government challenged that assumption. They believed that education ought not to be reserved for those lucky enough to travel a conventional route through life, and that people should have second chances—and third chances if they need them, and fourth chances too. Crucially, she insisted that there should be no lowering of standards and no second-class offer for those who had missed out the first time round.

Perhaps the most radical thing of all was that the Open University would be genuinely open. The White Paper made it clear that people should be able to study irrespective of their previous educational qualifications. In other words, someone would not be shut out just because they had not done their A-levels.

On all those points, the Government at the time were absolutely right, because the Open University has become one of the great success stories of modern Britain. Today, it is the largest university in the country, with around 125,000 students. Nearly a quarter of all part-time higher education students in this country study at the OU. It reaches every constituency, including my own, Southport, where around 135 people are currently studying through it. This is not some sort of niche institution sitting at the margins of education policy but one of the central pillars of lifelong learning in this country.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for celebrating such a great Labour achievement, led by a great Labour woman, Baroness Jennie Lee. Will he join me in congratulating the Open University and underlining its importance for people like me? I was looking after four children and was able to do a master’s at the Open University, spread out over three years, with some cutting-edge modules that I still rely on now. The Open University opens up education for people from all backgrounds, offering home-based and flexible learning, including for those with family responsibilities.

I am more than happy to commend Baroness Jennie Lee, and I am more than happy to celebrate the success of my hon. Friend and of the countless thousands of others who have studied around the real lives we all lead.

One reason why the Open University works is precisely because it understands something that many higher education institutions still struggle with: life is not linear. People do not all move neatly from school to university to career to retirement in a straight line. Our lives are messier than that. People leave school without confidence, drift into jobs and later discover different ambitions. They become parents, care for relatives, lose jobs, or their health changes. Sometimes, at 35, 45 or 55, they simply decide that they want to try something new. The original White Paper understood that. It explicitly talked about flexibility, recognising that some learners would move quickly and others slowly, depending on the realities of their lives. The Open University says something very simple to people in those circumstances: “It is not too late. It is never too late.”

I should declare an interest, because I would not be standing here in Westminster Hall this afternoon without the Open University. I did not come through the conventional route into higher education. I left school without much expectation that university was really for people like me. For most of my life, I worked in fairly ordinary, fairly low-paid jobs. For instance, I sold “Magic Tree” air-fresheners to petrol stations. I spent a decade working in a call centre for an insurance company. I spent a few soul-destroying months working for a debt collector, before I could take no more and quit to go back on the dole.

Like many people, I found that without qualifications there were doors that simply remained shut, no matter how hard I tried. The Open University changed all that for me, although not in some dramatic overnight fashion like we might see in a television drama. It was hard work. It meant studying in the evenings, at weekends, on the bus to and from work—and, to be honest, probably sometimes during work if the boss was not looking. I was doing assignments when other members of the family were watching television or going out and getting on with their lives. But it made something possible for me that would otherwise not have been possible: it gave me the ability to learn around my life.

My hon. Friend is speaking powerfully about his story and his experience of higher education. Young people from more advantaged or affluent backgrounds are still much more likely to enter higher education than their less-advantaged peers. Socioeconomic background—what we more commonly call class—is still the strongest predictor of university attendance. Does my hon. Friend agree that the mission at the heart of the 1966 White Paper, to expand access to higher education and spread opportunity, is just as relevant today as it was then?

Definitely. If anything, it is even more important in 2026, with all the challenges we see around us.

As I said, we should be honest about the challenges. Despite the success of institutions like the Open University, adult participation in higher education has fallen over the last decade. Too often, the system still feels like it is designed around the traditional undergraduate who left school at 18, rather than the parents in their 30s or 40s, the worker retraining after redundancy or the person managing long-term ill health while trying to rebuild their future. Yet mature students are not some small minority: more than a third of undergraduate entrants are mature learners. They are already a major part of our higher education system, whether we recognise it fully or not.

That is why I welcome the broad direction of travel on lifelong learning and the more flexible provision the Government are pursuing. The principle is right—people should be able to access education throughout their lives and in a way that fits around their work and family—but it remains true that implementation and delivery matter as well. If lifelong learning is genuinely to continue to work, people need a system they can understand and easily navigate. The funding regime needs to feel straightforward and fair. Flexible provision has to be properly supported. Employers need to be part of the conversation. And, frankly, we need many more people just to know that these opportunities exist, because too many adults still assume that higher education is simply not for people like them.

I ask the Minister to reflect on the role that institutions such as the Open University can play in regions like mine. One of its great strengths is that people do not have to leave their communities to access the opportunities available to them. That matters in places that have too often watched talent drain away, like the region I am from. Somebody in Southport or St Helens, in Birkenhead or Bootle, should not necessarily have to move away from their home town to improve their prospects. The Open University allows people to build skills while remaining rooted in the places that they love and that they want to contribute to. That strikes me as important, not just educationally but economically and socially.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I thank and congratulate the hon. Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) on securing this debate. I should also declare that I am a graduate and alumnus of the Open University, so I recognise many of those of its attributes that he mentioned. Unfortunately, I did not take the same speedy course that he did; in fact, it took me eight years to obtain my Bachelor of Science (Open), doing a 30-point level 1 to a 60-point level 3, with the odd 10-point thrown in in between—former graduates will know exactly what I am talking about.

The hon. Member talked about the changes we have seen in the Open University. I started when everything was tutor-marked assessments, which meant you had to post them to my tutor, and I finished when everything had to be submitted over the internet. There was always that panic when you pushed the send button at five minutes to midnight, hoping that your internet stayed connected until the tutor had received your full assignment. However, I do not go back to the times when members were setting video cassette recorders to record lectures on BBC Two at 2 am, as was necessary then.

The hon. Member talked about the Open University giving students the ability to learn while they were working. It also instilled deep-seated personal management skills, because students had to meet deadlines, while maintaining a work-life balance and family interaction. It is right that we recognise that on this 60th anniversary of the “University of the Air”. But we should also recognise the other things the Open University has done with regard to learning and education, including the “Green Planet” TV series, an environmental series co-produced with the BBC and narrated at that stage by Sir David Attenborough.

In terms of the opportunities offered by the Open University, I think everybody in the Chamber will recognise that there are four Northern Ireland MPs here today—that is four out of 11 or, as one of my maths courses taught me, 0.3636 recurring, as the decimalisation of the representation here from Northern Ireland. The hon. Member for Southport talked about the value of the regions, and the Open University is greatly recognised and valued in Northern Ireland, because of its ability to deliver courses across the regions and across abilities as well.

In Scotland, we are very proud that Jennie Lee, the architect of the Open University, came from Lochgelly, which is in my constituency. The hon. Gentleman rightly touched on the importance of the devolved Administrations working with the Open University to create higher education opportunities for people who would not normally have them. In Scotland, 30% of students at the Open University have a disability support need. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that is just one reason why it is important that the devolved Administrations, like the Westminster Government, work closely with the Open University to ensure that it can play its full role in lifelong learning?

I fully support the Member’s contribution. In fact, one in five Northern Ireland students is registered as having a disability. So the Open University opens up not just geographical and regional abilities but all abilities to lifelong learning.

Other Members have spoken about Jennie Lee, but I would like to diverge at this point and to take the opportunity to pay tribute to another individual, John D’Arcy, who was the director of the Open University in Ireland. John served 16 years in that post and just recently retired. I was working with him and through him, and his promotion of the Open University was testament to how we were able to produce it and forward it in Northern Ireland. It was very much his skill, his interaction and his time there that shaped the Open University as a public service. He did that with ambition and innovation and, above all, by always keeping people at the centre of it. We were grateful to John for all he brought to the university and that role.

One of John’s phrases was that the Open University in Northern Ireland was one of its best kept secrets, because the Open University was in fact the third university in Northern Ireland. It was during that time—I suppose from being a graduate of it—that I recognised that ability, and we were able, when I was Health Minister, to bring the Open University together with career progression and skill shortages and to marry the two up. At that point, we had 65 Open University undergraduate nursing places; currently, more than one third of Open University students in Northern Ireland are studying science, technology, engineering and maths subjects, and nearly 600 are training as nurses. One thing that was done was to allow people working as carers, but who did not have the opportunity to go to university to become nurses, to train in their workplace. What that did was bring a loyalty to many of the hospitals and wards, because people were being built up in the place they worked in and with the people they worked with. That was then able to be expanded into social work. The Open University was working with trusts and with our Department as well.

It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I say a big thank you to the hon. Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) for highlighting the wonderful work done by those institutions that are slightly off the beaten educational path, so to speak. Although the higher education sector has changed dramatically in the past 60 years, the Open University has continued to evolve, change and adapt while remaining true to its founding mission. From its inception, it has moved with the times. What began with television broadcasts, radio programmes and handwritten papers has now become a model of digital innovation and interactive online learning.

It is always a real pleasure to see the Minister in his place. We look forward to his answers to the questions we will ask, and I will have some in my contribution. The Open University came to the fore, if we are looking back just to the last few years, during the pandemic lockdown, when it led the way. Remote teaching was suddenly introduced in schools and universities, but the OU had already been delivering distance learning effectively for decades; it was leading the way at that time. Although many institutions were forced to rush and to improvise a remote learning model, the Open University was drawing on years of experience to support its students.

The Open University has given countless opportunities to working-class people who would otherwise never have had the chance to earn a degree. For many, the route to traditional universities had been out of reach, but the Open University offered a second, third or indeed fourth chance, producing graduates who have gone on to become nurses, teachers, engineers and community leaders, with many returning to the OU to complete their master’s degree and PhD. The hon. Member for South Antrim (Robin Swann) referred to the 65 who were on a course in his time as Health Minister and to the fact that it is now 600. That indicates just how many have been able to take advantage of this opportunity and to improve their life, improve their qualifications and improve life for others as a result.

Reflecting on the contributions so far, it is also worth noting that the Open University supports the members of our British armed forces through its courses.

I thank the hon. Member for reminding us that many in the armed forces have taken that opportunity. The opportunity is there within their busy lives, and the opportunity is clear. We must ensure that this proud and uniquely British success story keeps opening doors for generations to come. That has to be the ambition and the goal, and that is what we are doing.