Social Mobility: Local Roots, Lasting Change (Social Mobility Policy Committee Report)

Lord Harlech Excerpts

Friday 4th September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Harlech (Con)]

My Lords, as a member of the committee, I also express my gratitude to our chair, the noble Baroness, Lady Manningham-Buller, along with our clerk and her outstanding team. I draw attention to my registered interests as an employer and an active Army Reserve officer. I also pay tribute to the exceptional staff at Blackpool and The Fylde College, and all our witnesses. However, I want to reiterate our chair’s point that the publication of the Government’s response took eight months and was published on the day immediately after the House adjourned. I have formally written to the Government Chief Whip, the Minister, and the chair of the Liaison Committee regarding the timing of this response and performance.

The rate at which people are speaking makes this debate feel like a QSD. In conjunction with the meagre three minutes offered to respond to the committee’s serious hard work of nearly a year, my personal view is that this behaviour from the Government displays more than a degree of contempt for the committee’s work. It is also a shame that not a single Labour Back-Bencher who was part of the committee is here today; they were all very valid members during the committee’s work.

Turning to the substance of our report, employment remains the single most effective vehicle for social mobility—far surpassing any strategy, taskforce or policy framework—but to create the jobs, you need to create the right environment, including housing, transport and digital connectivity. However, cumulative burdens since 2024 have made hiring increasingly costly: higher employer national insurance contributions; above-inflation minimum wage growth, which has narrowed the youth pay differential; and immediate employment rights under the Employment Rights Act. Consequently, sectors like retail and hospitality—traditionally the primary entry point for young workers—are experiencing severe job cuts. The British Chambers of Commerce now projects youth unemployment to reach 17.6% next year. We should not be surprised that taxing employment results in fewer available jobs.

When our committee recommended lowering the levy rate for smaller businesses, we were informed that levy operations fall under Treasury jurisdiction. This policy environment leaves nearly a million young people not in education, employment or training. Among them, 60% have never held a job, compared to 40% in 2005. Government reviewer Alan Milburn calculates the annual economic cost of youth disengagement at £125 billion, exceeding our national education budget. The repercussions extend beyond economics. Milburn’s findings indicate that young men in the NEET category are five times more likely to acquire a criminal record than their peers, while half of those aged 15 to 17 in youth offender institutions possess primary school levels of literacy and numeracy.

[Captain of the King’s Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard and Deputy Chief Whip (Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent) (Lab)]

The noble Lord has exceeded his speaking time.

[Lord Harlech (Con)]

It is advisory. In the absence of legitimate career paths—

[Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)]

The noble Lord is right: the speaking time is advisory. However, given the number of speakers we have in all three of today’s debates, if the Ministers are going to have appropriate time to respond, and if we are going to finish at a reasonable hour on a Friday, it is three minutes.

[Lord Harlech (Con)]

I will then put forward two direct questions to the Minister. First, will she advocate with the Treasury to expand national insurance exemptions to cover all employees under 25 in the upcoming Budget? Secondly, will she confirm that the final Milburn report will be released promptly and that it will incorporate participation conditionality?