Creative Industries: Qualifications

Lord Isaac Excerpts

Thursday 23rd July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Isaac (Lab)]

My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lady Keeley for initiating this important debate on the future of post-16 creative education, an area that is often neglected when we focus on universities —it is the Cinderella sector, as many have noted. I declare an interest as the chair of governors of the University of the Arts London, which, as the House will have heard, runs the awarding body for the current diploma and extended diploma system.

As noble Lords have heard today, the arts are central to our cultural life. I have spoken about that many times in this Chamber. They are central to our economy, to social mobility and to the general well-being of society. As we have heard, they foster imagination, collaboration and, most importantly, innovation. That is why the Government have rightly identified the creative industries as one of the eight priority growth sectors in their industrial strategy. However, since 2010, the number of pupils taking GCSE creative subjects—as we just heard from the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett—has fallen by 40%, and the number of specialist arts teachers in state schools has fallen dramatically too. It is therefore vital that post-16 education provides strong pathways into employment, and further and higher education, for the diminishing number of students who wish to develop their creative skills.

This debate is not about undermining apprenticeships, T-levels, V-levels or A-levels. It is about ensuring that, in simplifying post-16 qualifications, we do not damage the established creative pathways that already serve students and employers well. Creative level 3 courses, as we have heard, must be broad, practical and portfolio based. They must allow time for experimentation, rehearsal and studio practice. They are essential to developing successful artists, designers, performers, filmmakers and media professionals—the names that we have heard this afternoon: Steve McQueen and Adele, as well as Tracey Emin and Grayson Perry.

We also need the creative industries to draw on talent from every background. Existing qualifications provide opportunities for disadvantaged students, young people with SEND and those at risk of becoming NEET. Together with A-levels and foundation courses, they are important routes into the workplace and higher education. In 2023, 96% of applicants holding the UAL level 3 extended diploma received a higher education offer, and I am delighted that 85% of those offered them accepted places. I fear that the new arrangements mean that fewer creative students will qualify for university or be able to develop the skills that employers need. The UCAS tariff for T-levels means that students must achieve a distinction to secure the points that many extended diploma students routinely attain. Some universities, as I understand it, are already declining to accept T-levels for certain creative degree courses.

There are also questions about capacity and scalability. This year, only 814 students started one of the two creative T-levels, compared with 84,000 studying level 3 creative diplomas and extended diplomas. How will we address those scalability challenges? I would be happy to explore that with the Minister and her colleagues. Colleges are also saying that current T-levels are too narrow and do not replace existing qualifications. Exeter College is a case in point. The college tells us that T-levels and extended diplomas are both on offer to their students but that the creative media course as a T-level lacks artistic context and focuses only on technical skills. We also know that the Becky Francis review recognised that, as currently anticipated, creative V-levels will not fill that gap and are too narrowly defined.

Until T-levels and V-levels can demonstrate the same breadth of learning, progression and outcomes as current creative qualifications, there is a compelling case for retaining successful level 3 creative diplomas. Without that safeguard, I fear these reforms risk narrowing opportunities for the next generation of creative talent. Our young people, our creative industries and our country deserve better.