To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of Alan Milburn's report Young people and work: interim report, published on 28 May; and what steps they intend to take to address the rising number of young people who are not in education, employment or training.
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name in the Order Paper. I understand that there is a debate going on about where I should be sitting. If I have got it wrong, I am really sorry.
My Lords, this Government’s priority is to ensure that young people have the best opportunities to get on in life. That is why we commissioned Alan Milburn to identify the underlying drivers of the NEET participation crisis. His interim report shows that this is a systemic challenge across departments and society. We are already taking action across education, health, youth services and welfare, and we will build further on this as we consider full recommendations from Alan Milburn in the autumn.
I thank the Minister for her Answer, which is encouraging. We on these Benches welcome the Milburn report. It is a serious, research-driven diagnosis of a problem that has accelerated since the pandemic. The NEET problem is complex and cuts across almost every government department—and it is more than welfare policy, as the Minister has already said. It is about interaction with education, skills, health and the labour market, economic growth and young people’s ability to transition from school to the labour market.
We all agree that economic growth matters and business confidence matters, and, most importantly, we need employers who are willing and able to afford to hire young people in the current climate. The latter is something we can address right now. Why will the Government not revoke the damaging policies—such as the increases in national insurance, increasing employment burdens and rising labour costs—that are preventing employers employing young people? That will reinvigorate the number of entry-level jobs, get young people into work and keep them there.
I was with the noble Baroness for the first part of her question. She is right: the Milburn report does identify a wide-ranging problem and a need for systemic and country-wide action. I am afraid that she may not have read it as carefully as she should have in relation to the last part of her question. Alan Milburn is very clear in paragraph 266 that
“it is worth remembering that those under 21 remain exempt from employer NICs and, as the review has already highlighted, the increase in youth inactivity long precedes any recent changes”
to NEETs. Employers do not pay national insurance contributions for under-21s, or for apprentices under 25. If national insurance contributions were really responsible for the rise in NEETs, why did the number increase by 250,000 before the general election and before any changes to employer national insurance were made?
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that excellent response. As she knows, I have been obsessed with this issue for many years, and I strongly welcome the fact that the Secretary of State asked Alan Milburn to undertake this review. Does she agree that this gives the opportunity, through the final report, to offer a comprehensive and coherent approach, including drawing together the measures the Government have already put in place? Does she also agree that the way this report was presented and communicated to the public was an exemplar that all of us in politics might learn from?
I do agree with my noble friend. The report rightly identified the systemic issues that have led to one million young people not being able to earn or learn. It is therefore this Government’s responsibility to take action—as we have already started to do—through the education system, through our youth services and through our welfare and health systems to address the wide range of issues that are leading to young people’s failure to start their working and learning lives in a way that will lead to the sorts of futures we all want them to have.
My Lords, as we have said, the Milburn review found that one million young people are now classed as NEET—the highest level for 12 years. The report warns that without further action, one in six young people could be in this position within five years. Hospitality vacancies alone have halved in four years. The Government’s own youth jobs grant will reach a miserable 60,000 young people over three years. This is a sticking plaster on a wound the Government helped create. Does the Minister agree that the jobs tax is hammering the very entry-level opportunities on which young people rely? Mention has been made of national insurance contributions. Could the Minister at least confirm that the Government will be consulting on a lower employer NIC band for workers earning between £5,000 and £9,100? The Minister’s comment about workers under 21 does not cover that wide gamut of people. I would like to feel that there is consultation as to how this is affecting the employment of young people.
I have already reminded noble Lords, given that we are talking about the Milburn report, what Alan Milburn actually said about the position with respect to national insurance contributions. I am disappointed that the noble Lord believes that this Government’s youth guarantee of £2.5 billion of investment—including a £3,000 youth jobs grant for every young person aged 18 to 24 who is hired across Great Britain and who has been looking for work for six months or more, available from next month—is somehow meaningless. It is really important, which is why I spend my time talking to employers about how this Government, alongside employers, can make the best use of the additional investment we are putting into ensuring that this is not a lost generation.
Is it possible for the Minister to explain to me this kind of scattergun effect? She says that it covers all departments—education and everything else—but why is there not a central office in government for the eradication of poverty? Only by bringing everyone’s energies together will we bring about change.
The noble Lord and I have discussed his suggestion, both in this Chamber and in my office. I would not agree with his characterisation that is a scattergun approach. What we have is a cross-government recognition of the challenge of ensuring that young people can get into work or can learn in pathways that will lead them to satisfactory work. That requires action in schools to identify young people who will potentially become NEET. It requires action, which we are taking, in the welfare system. It requires action in the Department of Health to support young people’s mental health needs. It requires the youth strategy that this Government have already produced. That is not scattergun; it is consistent cross-government action to tackle this problem.
Alan Milburn’s report highlighted the harms of social media for young people. Just a few weeks ago, the front page of the Mirror newspaper ran with the headline, “Kids’ social media ban within weeks”, citing Liz Kendall. Can the Minister please give us an update? Noble Lords were clear during the passage of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill on the importance of this.
Of course, during the passage of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, we took legislative powers to be able to implement the results of the consultation that is currently under way. I am glad that the noble Earl peruses the Daily Mirror, but I am afraid he will have to wait a bit longer, with the certainty that this Government will take action, for the results of that consultation.