Government Record on Education, Employment and Welfare

Baroness Evans of Bowes Park Excerpts

Thursday 16th July 2026 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Baroness Lady Evans of Bowes Park]

To move that this House takes note of the Government’s record on education, employment and welfare since July 2024.

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Con)]

My Lords, I am delighted to open this important debate on the Government’s record on education, employment and welfare, as we reach the end of the Starmer premiership and move to the Burnham one.

Over the past two years, an unfortunate pattern has emerged across the Government’s policies on these issues. Whether intended or not, their interventions have too often served to restrict opportunity rather than broaden it. Opportunity is the foundation of a free, prosperous society and economy. It is what allows a child from any background to succeed in education, a young person to secure their first job and an individual to build an independent life through work. Yet across education, employment and welfare, the Government have appeared increasingly determined to substitute individual aspiration and institutional freedom with central direction and state intervention. The result is not only a larger state—we just have to look at the eye-watering levels of government spending—but a society in which the pathways to fulfilling an individual’s potential are increasingly constrained and, in too many cases, cut off entirely. At a time when Britain faces economic and technological change, that is the wrong direction in which to travel.

I begin with education. The central question for any education system should be simple: are we giving the next generation the greatest possible opportunity to succeed? For much of the past two decades, the academies programme has helped answer that question positively. By giving schools greater freedom over recruitment, curriculum delivery, governance and innovation, academies have been an important driver of the significant improvements in standards and outcomes that have been achieved. Between 2009 and 2022, England rose from 21st to 11th in the PISA league tables for maths, from 25th to 13th for reading, and from 11th to 9th for science. Yet rather than building on this success, the Government in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act chose to curtail many of the freedoms that helped enable this progress. The reforms introduced by the Government to academies have represented a shift away from institutional autonomy and back towards central control. Schools now have less freedom to innovate, less flexibility to respond to local circumstances and fewer opportunities to develop distinctive approaches to excellence.

At the same time, concerns have been raised that the proposed curriculum reforms may reduce academic rigour, at precisely the moment when the demands on young people are increasing. This matters because today’s pupils will graduate into a labour market unlike any that we have previously known. AI is transforming entire sectors of the economy. Entry-level roles that once provided a foothold into professional careers are rapidly changing and, in some sectors, starting to disappear altogether. Young people will need stronger skills, higher levels of knowledge and greater resilience than ever before. So, if opportunity is our objective, we should strengthen the institutions that have delivered educational improvement, not restrict them.

It is not just academies that the Government have weakened; they have deliberately undermined the independent sector. Independent schools offer choice and the chance for social mobility through the standard of education they offer and the scholarships and partnerships they provide. Yet because of the Government’s decision to impose VAT—an unprecedented tax on education—four times more students have left independent schools than expected, and a number of schools have had to close entirely, putting unnecessary strain on the state school system. The closest thing we have to a silver bullet in public policy is education, to give children the best chance to realise their potential, so we should back all institutions that broaden their horizons, raise standards and equip young people for the challenges of a rapidly changing world—we should not undermine them.

The same concern around restricting opportunity applies to employment. Britain today faces significant labour market challenges, global economic uncertainty, technological disruption, high energy costs, a high tax burden and changing patterns of work. All these are affecting employers and employees alike. Many of these forces are not within the Government’s control, but the policy response most certainly is. As the curtain is drawn on the current Prime Minister’s and Chancellor’s tenures, their signature policy—and possibly one of the most damaging—has been a £25 billion a year increase in the tax on jobs. Despite warnings of the damage that would be caused, the Government imposed a higher rate and lowered the threshold at which national insurance is levied. Instead of focusing on creating the conditions for job creation, investment, economic dynamism and growth, government action has led to employers facing rising costs and growing regulatory burdens through the Employment Rights Act that increase both the cost and the risk of taking on staff.

The consequences are felt most acutely by those trying to enter the labour market for the first time. In the hospitality sector alone—one of the biggest employers of young people—the 2024 Budget amounted to £3.4 billion of annual tax increases, resulting in 100,000 job losses, falling mostly on those seeking entry level and part-time work. The figures show that more than 1 million young people aged 16 to 24 are now not in education, employment or training—the first time that figure has exceeded 1 million since 2013. Until the pandemic, NEET figures fell to below 10% in 2021 from nearly 17% in 2010. Youth unemployment has increased to 16.2%, equivalent to around 735,000 young people actively seeking work but unable to find it. We know that these are not merely statistics: they represent opportunities lost; young people unable to gain their first experience of work; skills left undeveloped; confidence undermined and ambitions postponed. Indeed, the recent Milburn review warned of a growing risk of a “lost generation”, because when opportunity disappears at the beginning of a career, the effects can last for decades.

There is of course an important role for programmes that support young people into work, particularly if they find that they do not have the skills needed to do the jobs in their area, and the previous Government had such schemes. However, we are now in the slightly surreal situation of the Government offering subsidies of £3,000 to employers to fund jobs for young people to deal with the damaging consequences of the employment taxes they have increased and the regulatory and wage costs they have imposed. That surely cannot be the answer to increasing opportunity across the jobs market.

That brings me, finally, to welfare. A compassionate welfare system is essential. It should provide support during periods of hardship, illness and transition, but at its heart it must be designed to help people move towards independence and participation in the labour market wherever possible. Increasingly, however, we appear to be moving towards a model that places greater emphasis on long-term dependency than on economic mobility. Every day, 1,000 people are signed off on to benefits with no requirements to look for work. Welfare spending is set to hit £370 billion by the end of the Parliament. This is simply unfair. It is unfair to taxpayers—the people going out to work to pay for those who do not—and to the people who are written off and not supported to find a job.

The Work and Pensions Secretary has said that all his colleagues want to talk about is how to raise more tax to spend on welfare. This is not simply fiscally unsustainable; it leads to the gradual erosion of the principle that work provides dignity, purpose and independence. When young people see limited rewards from entering employment and growing financial incentives to remain outside the labour market, the long-term effect is fewer opportunities for advancing and greater dependency on the state. That is neither socially desirable nor economically sustainable.

The Government’s response to the challenges we face in education, employment and welfare has too often been the same: more intervention and regulation, greater centralisation and increased cost. Yet the evidence suggests that lasting opportunity is rarely created by government direction. Opportunity is created when schools are trusted to excel, when businesses are confident enough to invest and hire and when individuals are empowered to build independent lives through work.

The challenge facing Britain today is not merely one of economic growth; it is a question of whether the next generation will enjoy greater opportunities than the last. On education, welfare and employment, the Government should ask themselves one question: are their policies expanding opportunity or restricting it? Unfortunately, too often over the past two years, the answer has appeared to be the latter. If we want to give young people the chance to succeed in an increasingly competitive world, we must reverse that trend. We must trust individuals, institutions, business and enterprise more, and place opportunity, not state control, at the centre of public policy.

I hope that the new Burnham Government will learn the lessons of the past two years and look to change course: to reduce the welfare bill and focus tirelessly on supporting those who can work into employment; to cut taxes on jobs and ensure that businesses can grow their workforces, invest in their futures and thrive again; and to once again trust head teachers to deliver the best education they can for their pupils. I beg to move.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Evans of Bowes Park (Con)]

My Lords, I am very grateful for the contributions of noble Lords across the House to this debate. A wealth of expertise, experience and passion has been evident throughout.

What came across loud and clear in so many contributions—indeed, it was acknowledged by the Minister in her wind-up—was the need for government to consider policies and interventions across education, employment and welfare in the round. They are inextricably interconnected, and policies developed in one silo of government can have unintended and damaging consequences in another—as, unfortunately, we have seen too often over the last couple of years. As we heard powerfully across the House, nowhere is this joined-up thinking more urgently needed than in tackling the growing number of young people not in education, employment and training.

I again thank everyone who has contributed today and commend this Motion to the House.

Motion agreed.