Opportunity for All Contents Introduction and Executive Summary 2 1 Background 6 1.1 The nature of the problem 6 1.2 The Liberal Democrat Way Forward 9 2 Financial Support for FE 13 2.1 Lifelong Training Grants 13 2.2 Further Education Funding 14 2.3 Post-16 Support 16 3 Incentivising Training in Industry 17 3.1 Apprenticeships and a Skills and Training Account 17 3.2 Micro credits 21 3.3 Skills Tax Credits 22 3.4 Skills Cooperatives for SMEs 23 3.5 AI Training in the Public Sector 23 3.6 Access to Work 24 4 Vocational Qualifications 25 4.1 Strengthening T-Levels and supporting BTECs 25 4.2 UTC Sleeve 26 5 Mentoring and Careers Guidance 27 5.1 Mentoring 27 5.2 Careers Guidance 29 6 Ensuring access to training and work for all 32 Introduction and Executive Summary As Liberals, we believe that everyone deserves the chance to get on in life and see their hard work and aspiration properly rewarded. We believe everyone should have the opportunity to flourish, no matter what their background or personal circumstances. We know that a strong and thriving economy is one that develops the skills of its people and uses them for the benefit of all, and we recognise education as the best possible investment in our country’s future. Unlike Labour, we don’t think the state always knows best. We believe that the true role for government is to empower individuals to make their own choices and free them to develop their own talents to the full. But unlike the Conservative Party and Reform, we understand that this requires an active and effective state, investing in education and training to give everyone access to the skills they need for the jobs of the future. Skills are therefore at the heart of the Liberal Democrat vision for a fair, free and open society. This paper sets out our plan to ensure everyone has access to the training they need to develop their talents and realise their potential – helping to boost our economy and enlarge opportunity for all. Liberal Democrats believe that: * The UK faces critical skills shortages in sectors such as social care, construction, AI, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing. * Employer investment in training has dropped by 28% per employee since 2005, while further education funding and participation have been in long-term decline. * The Government’s newly created Skills England lacks the operational independence needed to be accountable, flexible, and to drive genuine workforce planning. * Persistent inequalities limit access to skills training, with adult learners, young carers, care leavers, prisoners, ethnic minorities, socio-economically disadvantaged people, disabled people, and parents facing systemic barriers. Liberal Democrats further believe that: * Equipping people with the skills they need is essential to improving economic productivity, addressing labour shortages, and empowering individuals to thrive in a changing world. * The skills system must be locally responsive, nationally coherent, and built around the needs of individuals and employers alike. * Lifelong learning is essential in an era of rapid technological and economic change, and governments must guarantee access to training and support throughout working lives. Liberal Democrats would: * Set the right institutional framework for opportunity and skills in England by: * Reforming Skills England to establish a truly independent, arms length body, accountable to Parliament and supported by regional and sectoral partners, to forecast future workforce needs and guide investment. * Requiring regions to produce Workforce Development Plans aligned with industrial strategy, devolve skills funding to Mayoral Combined Authorities (MCAs) and county partnerships, within a national framework of performance and quality assurance. * Boost the funds available for Further Education in England by: * Introducing a £10,000 Lifelong Training Grant for every adult, disbursed in tranches at ages 25 (£4,000), 40 (£3,000), and 55 (£3,000), with clear guidance to support its use for re-skilling and career transitions. * Ending VAT penalties on FE colleges. * Extending the Pupil Premium to post-16 FE learners. * In the long run, equalising per-student funding in FE with school sixth forms. * Incentivise and Improve Training in the Workforce by: * Transforming the Apprenticeship Levy into a Skills and Training Account model which would empower employers and individuals to fund training. * Boosting the take-up of apprenticeships by guaranteeing they are paid at least the National Minimum Wage through scrapping the lower apprentice rate. * Introducing Skills Tax Credits with enhanced relief for priority sectors. * Establishing Skills Cooperatives of SMEs to pool training resources and rotate apprentices between member businesses. * Enabling funding of accredited micro-credentials and modular learning to increase flexibility and participation. * Guaranteeing AI training for all public sector workers, ensuring confidence in the use of emerging technologies. * Strengthen the Uptake of Vocational Qualifications by: * Supporting BTECs and reform T-levels into modular formats with flexible industry placements. * Expanding the UTC sleeve model to allow technical education within mainstream schools. * Improve the support and guidance available to learners at all levels by: * Making careers guidance a statutory part of the curriculum from primary school onwards. * Strengthening the National Careers Service’s adult offer and face-to-face capacity. * Supporting voluntary mentoring schemes in places of work. * Take steps to tackle barriers faced by specific groups including: * Extending the Childcare Grant currently available to low-income HE students to all full-time students undertaking eligible courses regardless of level. * Treat parents on full-time courses much like working parents, and offer them an additional 15 hours free childcare for 3-4-year-olds for 38 weeks of the year. * Speeding up the process to recognise asylum seekers and refugee’s existing qualifications where possible, so they can use their existing skills here in the UK. * Expanding the Pupil Premium to include extra funding for young carers, and exempt young adult carers from the ‘21-hour rule’ that currently prevents them from claiming Carer’s Allowance if they study for more than 21 hours per week. * Improving the provision of training, education and work opportunities in prisons. * Make care experience a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 to strengthen the rights of people who are in or have been in care to receive training. * Ringfencing part of the Adult Education Budget for training opportunities for adults with disabilities. ________________ 1 Background 1.1 The nature of the problem 1.1.1 Skills gaps in the economy There are skills gaps and shortages across the economy, with severe challenges in a variety of critical sectors. Digital skills affect 99% of businesses, with 7.3 million employed adults lacking essential workplace skills. Health and adult social care face 40% skills shortage vacancy rates, with 430,000 additional posts needed by 2035. Clean energy energy employment is growing five times faster than the overall economy but faces critical skills gaps that could undermine the path to net zero. Construction reports 52% of vacancies as skills-shortage vacancies, discrediting housing targets. The increase in defence expenditure to 2.5% of GDP and beyond requires significant workforce development in advanced manufacturing, as well as more specialist digital skills. There is a huge expansion in the number of employers looking to fill posts in cyber security, artificial intelligence (AI), and data analysis. These sectoral challenges reflect broader economic problems and the ongoing productivity crisis. 1.1.2 Lack of skills planning Despite this pressing need, skills as a policy priority has been damaged by constant changes in institutional structures over many years. Reporting and forecasting on skills needs was once carried out by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES), but this organisation was disbanded by the Conservatives in 2017. The Labour government has tried to address this through the creation of Skills England, but this falls short in many respects. 1.1.3 Impacts of Brexit and Covid The workforce has got smaller post-Covid from a combination of early retirement and younger people staying in education longer. In certain sectors, the impact is severe. For example, there is currently a deficit of HGV drivers. Covid and Brexit have both played a role in this – the former by slowing down the process of training new drivers, the latter by making it more challenging for non-UK citizens to work and reside in the UK as HGV drivers. Many UK-residing EU HGV drivers chose to work on the continent due to better financial opportunities and the Brexit vote's implications. Equally, social care employers have been hit. The adult social care vacancy rate has risen 2.3 percentage points since 2012/13. With an ageing population, this problem is likely to worsen. 1.1.4 Issues with the basic education system Many sectors are experiencing skills gaps, where there is a mismatch between the education provided in schools and colleges, and the skills and knowledge employers expect students to have. The expectations set through the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) can too often lead to a restricted curriculum being taught as schools with limited resources are forced to focus narrowly on high stakes written examinations. Too often, the current system leaves young people without the digital, technical, green or creative skills the economy needs, or fails to foster essential skills such as problem-solving, teamworking, adaptability or oracy. Equally, many young people leave school without key life skills such as financial literacy, skills that are more important than ever given the growing ‘gig economy’. Of course, acquiring skills for work and life is not the sole purpose of education, but it is nonetheless fundamental. 1.1.5 Lack of Management Training A survey of more than 4,500 workers and managers by the Chartered Management Institute, conducted by YouGov in 2023, found that 82 per cent of those who enter management positions have not had any formal management or leadership training. These are sometimes known as ‘accidental managers’. The study found that this included a quarter (26 per cent) of senior managers, while half (52 per cent) of managers had no management or leadership qualification. It also found that 31 per cent of managers and 28 per cent of workers have left a job because of a negative relationship with their manager. Problems with lack of management training then feed back into managers not understanding the value of training and not seeing it as a priority. 1.1.6 Barriers to adults undertaking more training Some adults don’t see the benefits of training, and some who do lack the time. The financial barriers preventing adults from accessing training are stark and systematic. Research shows that 55% of people not in work live in households earning less than £25,000 per year, making self-funding training prohibitive for individuals. Yet employer investment in training has fallen 28% per employee since 2005, leaving individuals to fund their own skills development at precisely the time when technological change demands continuous learning. There is, moreover, a lack of information, advice and guidance for adults and employers. There has been a sharp decline in funding for classroom based training for adults, although not for apprenticeships. The net result is that between 2010 and 2021 the number of learners over 25 dropped by 51%. This decline is heavily skewed towards the most deprived areas. Between 2017 and 2022 skills shortages in the UK doubled to more than half a million, and accounted for 36% of job vacancies. 1.1.7 Barriers based on discrimination People from lower social economic groups or with protected characteristics can face additional hurdles in accessing training opportunities. For example, while women may be well-represented overall in apprenticeships, they are often concentrated in specific, lower-paying fields, such as care work and hairdressing, while facing underrepresentation in traditionally male-dominated sectors like construction and engineering. With regards to race, in 2021 23.6% of FE students overall were from Black, Asian, mixed or ‘other’ ethnic groups, but the same groups accounted for only about 14% of those undertaking apprenticeships or T-levels. 1.2 The Liberal Democrat Way Forward 1.2.1 We recognise that the skills system needs to both (a) facilitate skills and training for jobs and (b) help individuals access courses for broader self-development, which can be very important for example for older people or people struggling with mental health issues. However, given the acute skills problems faced in many sectors of the economy and the crisis of low productivity in the UK, overall financial support has to be prioritised for making sure people can improve their employment opportunities and that key sectors have the skilled workforce they need. 1.2.2 We believe the Government needs to set out a long-term vision and strategy for the English skills system which can deliver the range of technical and transferable skills employers need and boost investment and capability in workforce planning and development. This is also needed to enable more people to adapt to the impact of technology, to upskill and reskill at different stages in their working lives. It is particularly important with the growing impact of AI on jobs, in the context of the net-zero transition, and in view of the planned expansion in defence capacity, that the UK has a clear and coherent vision of what it needs and wants from its skills and training sector. It is welcome that the Labour Government has committed to bringing forward a comprehensive strategy for post-16 education, and have moved to establish a national body for skills, through Skills England. However, concerns over the operational independence of Skills England, nested within the Department for Education must be assuaged. England needs a truly independent body, supported by regional and subregional institutions, to take up the role previously undertaken by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES) in seeking to forecast future skills needs for the economy as a whole. For Skills England to fulfil this function, it must be properly independent. 1.2.3 The stated ambitions of Skills England are to build world class skills, enable growth and opportunity, understand the nation’s skills needs and improve the skills offer, simplify access to skills to boost economic growth and to mobilise employers and other partners, co-creating solutions to meet national, regional and local skills needs. Previous skills bodies, such as IfATE and the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, were established as non-department public bodies, which reported to their boards largely made up of employer and provider representatives, rather than government officials. Skills England however is an executive agency of the Department for Education formally established on 2 June 2025. The agency has assumed the functions transferred to the Secretary of State from the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education. Skills England’s chief executive says it will report to DfE’s director general for skills, not the board. 1.2.4 Liberal Democrats along with many in the skills sector have grave reservations about the way in which Skills England has been set up. As a Government Executive Agency, it will lack independence and be more beholden to the government. This in turn will make it more susceptible to central direction and less open to reflecting the needs of the real economy. It will have less credibility with industry and less clout across Whitehall. 1.2.5 Liberal Democrats would therefore reform Skills England as a proper arms-length body, accountable through an independent board and ultimately to Parliament. 1.2.6 This reformed Skills England clearly cannot conduct detailed workforce planning for every sector of the economy. However we believe there is scope for much better workforce planning in many aspects of the public sector. For example, the social care sector is in an acute staffing situation and would obviously benefit from a more coherent approach. A strategy should include strands on recruitment, retention, development and training, and tackling inequalities. It would be the role of Skills England to promote sectors to develop workforce plans involving all stakeholders. 1.2.7 Regional workforce planning will be coordinated through MCAs where they exist, and enhanced county partnerships elsewhere. Each region will be required to produce Workforce Development Plans aligned with Local Growth Plans and national industrial strategy, with Skills England providing technical support and quality assurance while ensuring coherence across regional boundaries. 1.2.8 Effective skills policy requires both national coherence and local responsiveness. Liberal Democrats unequivocally support devolving skills funding to regions, but recognise this must be within a robust framework that ensures quality and prevents a postcode lottery. Where Mayoral Combined Authorities exist and demonstrate sufficient maturity, they should become the primary delivery vehicle for skills funding and workforce planning. However, this devolution must be established through demonstrated capability, with clear performance thresholds and ongoing oversight to prevent policy drift. Skills England will have responsibilities including: maintaining national occupational standards across all devolved delivery; conducting regular capability assessments of regional bodies; providing intervention support for underperforming areas; and facilitating cross-regional collaboration on shared priorities. Skills England would also liaise as appropriate with the Just Transition Commission proposed in policy paper 160 For People, For Planet on its plans for transferring skills from declining industries in the energy sector to new green industries. 1.2.9 To ensure accountability, we will establish performance frameworks with clear intervention triggers, annual regional skills performance reports, and requirements for regional bodies to demonstrate effective cross-boundary collaboration and alignment with national industrial strategy. While the government plans universal MCA coverage across England, the current 61% coverage means we may need interim arrangements for areas not yet covered by MCAs. 1.2.10 As set out in 1.1.7 there are very stark inequalities in access to skills. This issue is multi-faceted, with factors such as income, region, parental and caring responsibilities, gender and race all playing a part. We would require Skills England to conduct monitoring of the design and implementation of skills policies to address this. 2 Financial Support for FE 2.1 Lifelong Training Grants 2.1.1 As Liberal Democrats, we believe that the best way to help people achieve their potential is to empower them individually. We therefore want to give people control over funding which they can use as they choose to upgrade their skills over a working lifetime. We believe this support should however be staggered over time to ensure people have resources available to them later in their careers. 2.1.2 A Liberal Democrat government will provide every adult with £10,000 to spend on education and training throughout their lives. This ‘Lifelong Training Grant’ will give every person the opportunity to retrain and upskill for jobs that we can't even imagine yet, addressing the reality that skills now become obsolete more quickly due to technological advancement. 2.1.3 The grant will be staged over working life: £4,000 available from age 25, £3,000 from age 40, and £3,000 at age 55. This staging aligns with career development patterns – early career establishment when people discover skills gaps, mid-career transition when technological change requires re-skilling, and pre-retirement adaptation when traditional career patterns are changing. Individuals, employers and local government will be able to pay to top-up the grants from their own resources. If people choose not to take up the earlier tranches of the grant, they can roll it over to later periods of life. 2.1.4 To ensure the money is well spent, we will provide advice and guidance to people on their options when the time comes to use the money. The overall skills strategy and the workforce plans set out in Chapter One above will also provide an overall framework for guidance. We would expect a range of providers to come forward for accreditation, including FE Colleges and Higher Education Institutions. 2.1.5 As set out in policy paper 160 For People, For Planet, we will double the level of the Lifelong Training Grant in designated transitioning areas to ensure stronger investment in retraining opportunities. 2.2 Further Education Funding 2.2.1 Further Education has suffered from significant cuts over many years. In last year’s Autumn Budget, the government announced a £300 million boost for colleges and sixth forms in 2025–26. However, rising student numbers and inflation mean that, even if the entire amount were directed to 16–19 education, it would only maintain funding per student at current levels in real terms. The situation is no better for adult education and skills funding tells a similar story. Learner numbers have fallen dramatically alongside these reductions. 2.2.2 The financial challenges are exacerbated by the growth of the student population. Since 2018, the number of 16- to 18-year-olds has grown 13 per cent, by 230,000 with a further 5 per cent increase anticipated by 2028. If participation rates remain unchanged, this means an extra 60,000 students in colleges and sixth forms. 2.2.5 To keep funding per student at current levels in real terms, the government would need to increase annual funding by almost £200 million in today’s prices by 2027–28. 2.2.6 Many providers are already feeling the financial strain. In 2022–23 37% of FE colleges reported operating in deficit – a reminder of the challenges already faced by many institutions as they attempt to alleviate rising costs. 2.2.7 In light of this massive squeeze on FE, we would as an immediate step to give some relief to address the anomalous VAT treatment of FE Colleges. Under the VAT rules, tax can be levied on goods at different rates, including the standard rate of 20%, a reduced rate of 5% for certain items, and zero-rated goods. While many public bodies, such as schools and academies, can reclaim VAT on their purchases, FE colleges are not included in the list of exempt organisations. This has created an unfair situation where schools with sixth forms can reclaim VAT, but FE colleges with sixth forms cannot. Tackling this is worth about £210 million to the FE sector. 2.2.8 The funding crisis in FE has created an acute teacher recruitment and retention crisis. FE teachers earn on average 23% less than school teachers and 11% less than equivalent roles in industry. This pay disadvantage, combined with excessive workloads and limited career progression, is driving talented teachers away from the sector at the very time we need them most to deliver the skills we require. Liberal Democrats believe that teachers delivering similar levels of education should receive comparable pay regardless of the institutional setting. We will therefore establish a statutory framework plotting the path for FE teacher pay scales to reach parity with school teacher pay scales. This will be underpinned by the creation of an Independent FE Pay Review Body with powers equivalent to the School Teachers' Review Body, ensuring FE teachers receive fair, evidence-based pay recommendations that government commits to funding. 2.2.9 The root cause of the FE funding crisis lies in the historic disparity in per-student funding between colleges and school sixth forms. Our long-term goal will be for FE funding per student to reach parity with school sixth form funding per student. Such an equalisation will provide the sustainable funding base needed to support competitive teacher pay and high-quality provision across the FE sector. 2.3 Post-16 Support 2.3.1 The attainment gap doesn’t end at 16, and neither should dedicated funding to tackle it. Further Education colleges disproportionately serve students from disadvantaged backgrounds - 43% of their students are from families eligible for free school meals compared to 32% in school sixth forms and sixth form colleges. 2.3.2 A Liberal Democrat government would extend the Pupil Premium to post-16 education, providing substantial additional funding per student from disadvantaged backgrounds. This funding could be used for evidence-based interventions such as attendance support programs, mentoring and enhanced professional development for teachers. 2.3.3 We will also extend free school meals to all post-16 students eligible for free school meals at 16. As education is now compulsory until 18, it is unreasonable to expect families to suddenly bear the cost of meals when many young people remain financially dependent. 3 Incentivising Training in Industry 3.1 Apprenticeships and a Skills and Training Account 3.1.1 Despite various reforms over the last decade, the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy and new post-16 vocational initiatives, there has been a drop in apprenticeship starts and an overall fall in employer investment in employee skills development, a reduction of 28%, per employee from £2,139 to £1,530. There has been almost universal agreement among stakeholders that the Apprenticeship Levy as introduced by the Conservatives was not working well. Employer levy payers cite a lack of clarity and confusion as to where to find information and support to engage with the apprenticeship and wider skills system and a lack of relevance to all their skill needs. The investment in SME Apprenticeships was capped and they lack tailored information on selecting an apprenticeship standard relevant to their business needs. 3.1.2 Overall, employers and individuals lack the empowerment necessary to boost the take up of skills development and to sustain engagement within the vocational skills system. The investment in skills has been insufficient and over the 3 years to 2023 £3.3bn of the Apprenticeship Levy was ‘unspent’ and returned to HMRC rather than being directed towards other skills programmes, often because employers find the apprentice requirement too restrictive. Money has been diverted away from entry-level apprenticeships and towards executive career development such as MBAs, and overall the number of apprenticeships for those under 24 has fallen significantly since levy was introduced. There are disparities in the uptake of apprenticeships, across the socially disadvantaged and ethnic groups. 3.1.3 The Labour government has introduced a number of reforms to the Apprenticeship system. They have announced that they will change the Apprenticeship Levy into a Skills and Growth Levy, with only 50% of the money reserved for apprenticeships specifically. They have also introduced a number of new entry-level foundation apprenticeships, and committed extra funding. All of these measures are welcome and should help to address some of the problems with the original scheme. However at the same time they have withdrawn funding from Level 7 (Masters Equivalent) Apprenticeships for over 21s. The government’s restriction of Level 7 apprenticeships to under-22s fails to distinguish between genuine professional entry routes and executive development training disguised as apprenticeships. Liberal Democrats would retain Level 7 funding for designated shortage professions such as social work, nursing and engineering specialisms where apprenticeships provide essential pathways for non-graduates. In addition, we would restrict Level 7 funding where candidates already hold equivalent qualifications. Skills England would maintain a regularly reviewed list of qualifying Level 7 standards based on verified skills shortages and public benefit assessments. 3.1.4 There is a critical need for national post-16 education and skills strategies to be aligned with both industrial/economic and social inclusion strategies. Our policy is to increase employers’ and the individuals’ investment in skills, doing this in ways that improve employment and productivity and narrow opportunity gaps between groups. We will ensure all employers, including SMEs, have access to support to help to undertake an analysis of their skill needs. Our focus will be to address current and future skill gaps and reform the vocational skills system into a more coherent and connected approach to ensure all investment is focused to achieve better skill outcomes at all levels of attainment. New Standards for vocational skill attainment will apply across the totality of the system, irrespective of whether the supply source is Private, Further or Higher Education. The opportunities for participation will be across all levels of the standards, from entry through to degree level. The provision will be more modular and accredited to support ongoing participation and achievement, overtime and more responsive to the skill need and choice identified as relevant to the business requirement and the individual’s career goals. High quality advice and guidance will be available to guide the employer and individual, to the right vocational options. An online Skills Account system will record and monitor the participation and outcomes resulting from the public, employer levy or the individuals’ investment. The funding of skills will be responsive to the employer and individual needs and provision organised to facilitate access that is demand-led. 3.1.5 We propose to expand the levy into a wider ‘Skills and Training Account’ to help prepare the UK’s workforce for the economic challenges ahead. 25% of the funds raised, should address ‘Social Mobility’, aiming to widen the opportunity for engagement in vocational training of the more disadvantaged and disengaged. 3.1.6 We will boost the take-up of apprenticeships by guaranteeing they are paid at least the National Minimum Wage through scrapping the lower apprentice rate. As proposed in policy paper 160 For People, For Planet, we will also develop a Green Apprenticeship programme, including advanced apprenticeships, backed up with new sector-led national colleges. 3.1.7 To achieve an increase in the take up of apprenticeships and vocational training, it will be key to empower employers and individuals to have ownership of the opportunity to acquire skills. The Skills and Training Accounts will be the platform for employer and personal ownership of the system, necessary to stimulate an increase in participation and investment. 3.1.8 It is important that the Apprenticeship and vocational training intermediaries, responsible for the setting of standards, remove any narrow and overlapping standards, ensuring that core and transferable skills are embedded in a consistent way and described using an agreed common language. 3.1.9 We advocate the requirement for apprenticeship standards to include a nationally recognised qualification, membership of a professional body, or a licence to practise. We would encourage greater scope for part-time apprenticeships, which may be a better way into training for some people. 3.1.10 The Skills Accounts should be operated in a way that the offer is a training route to a skilled role, irrespective of the provision and funding accessed to support the journey and irrespective of the Provider used to deliver the skill outcomes. Provision should be designed as offering employers high-quality apprenticeships and vocational training that is of most value to both the individual and the employer. High-quality skill outcomes often take time to achieve and might not be fulfilled within the current timings applied to apprenticeships or degrees. 3.1.11 The Skills Accounts must facilitate access to a flexible modular curriculum offering a portfolio of skill standards that are not bound by imposed time stages. Ongoing continuous assessments and recognition, accredited if appropriate, will be plotted and recorded in the Skills Account accessed through a national online digital record. Flexibility in the offer and engagement is the bedrock of a demand led system and the empowerment of employers and individuals. 3.1.12 As noted above in 1.1.7, there are particular issues with access to apprenticeships by women and members of ethnic minority groups. We would require Skills England to work with training providers and employers to overcome these barriers. MCAs and local government also have a role to play in this. 3.2 Micro credits We must also recognise that people’s busy lives and an expectation of flexibility and convenience means that learning itself must change. Micro-credits for short courses have the potential of delivering needed skills where and how people want them, below is a summary of the benefits based on evidence taken: Flexibility and convenience This is a primary advantage. Micro-credentials allow individuals to learn at their own pace, at any time, and from any location. This is ideal for working professionals, those with family commitments, or anyone with a busy schedule, as it allows them to fit learning seamlessly into their lives without disrupting daily responsibilities. Targeted and relevant Unlike traditional, broader degree programs, micro-credentials focus on specific, in-demand skills and competencies. This means learners gain expertise directly applicable to their job or desired career path, ensuring the learning is highly relevant and up-to-date with industry trends and technologies. Career impact Because they are short and focused, micro-credentials allow for quicker skill acquisition. This can lead to immediate career impact, opening up new job opportunities, promotions, or enabling individuals to pivot into new roles more rapidly. Motivation and engagement The ‘bite-sized’ nature prevents information overload and keeps learners engaged. Short, focused modules with clear learning objectives and tangible achievements (like digital badges or certificates) can boost motivation and encourage continuous learning. Personalised Learners can select specific modules that align with their individual needs, interests, and career goals, creating customized learning pathways. However, these courses – of which there are plenty – need clear accreditation and support from the Government. At a minimum this should be a regularly reviewed and updated list of Government-approved micro courses that are clearly linked back to specific skills and tasks but more maximally we would look to allow these courses to be funded under the Skills and Growth Levy allowing for greater participation. 3.3 Skills Tax Credits 3.3.1 A comprehensive Skills Tax Credit system would incentivise employer investment in training across all sectors. This would provide enhanced tax relief on qualifying training costs, with the highest rates reserved for training that addresses critical skills shortages identified by Skills England. 3.3.2 The system would operate with tiered rates: enhanced relief for training in priority sectors, (e.g. defence, digital, construction, green skills, healthcare), standard rates for any training meeting national occupation standards, and basic relief for other qualifying training leading to recognised qualifications. 3.3.3 The tiered approach directs maximum support to where it’s most needed while encouraging broader skills investment. The priority sectors would be reviewed annually by Skills England. 3.3.4 Skills Cooperatives (next section) would receive the highest tier rates regardless of sector, encouraging SMEs to pool training resources. 3.4 Skills Cooperatives for SMEs 3.4.1 As discussed elsewhere in this paper, SMEs face barriers to skills investment. While SMEs employ 60% of the private sector workforce, they lack the scale to justify dedicated training infrastructure and struggle to navigate complex training systems. 3.4.2 A Liberal Democrat government would support the establishment of Skills Cooperatives – networks of 10-50 SMEs in related sectors that pool resources for collective training investment. Cooperatives would share training coordinators and facilities, develop sector-specific training programs aligned to national standards, and enable apprentice rotation between member businesses. 3.4.3 Skills Cooperatives would be supported through enhanced tax relief under the Skills Tax Credit system, along with development grants for new cooperatives and local coordination support. 3.5 AI Training in the Public Sector 3.5.1 Analysis of the latest Employer Skills Survey (ESS) in 2022 revealed that employers were spending a fifth less on employee training than they were a decade ago. While other survey work found that nearly a third (30%) of workplaces don’t offer employees the opportunity to learn new skills or invest time in development, and that almost one in ten (9%) workers last invested time in learning new skills for the workplace five years ago. 3.5.2 The picture is more positive in the public sector where there is a culture of continued professional development that could be seized on. This is not insignificant with the latest data from December 2024 showing that employment in the public sector was estimated at 6.14 million. 3.5.3 We would therefore introduce a new guarantee of AI training for all public sector workers, ensuring that all NHS staff, local government employees and those working in our civil service have access to tools and training to continually keep abreast of the latest developments, increase their levels of confidence and comfort using new AI tools and support greater adoption rates at work and in their personal lives. 3.6 Access to Work 3.6.1 We will make it easier for disabled people to access the world of work, including by raising employers’ awareness of the Access to Work scheme, and making the scheme fit for purpose, such as by simplifying and speeding up the application process. 3.6.2 To tackle the disability employment gap, we will implement a targeted strategy to support disabled people into work, with specialist disability employment support. As part of this, we would give disabled people the right to work from home unless there is a reason why this is not possible. 4 Vocational Qualifications 4.1 Strengthening T-Levels and supporting BTECs 4.1.1 We recognise T-levels as an important development in technical education, delivering positive outcomes for many students, but recognise significant implementation challenges prevent T-levels serving all students effectively. T-level completion rates are concerning and there are high drop rates among disadvantaged and female students, with over a third leaving education and training altogether to become NEET. 4.1.2 Liberal Democrats would introduce a modular structure for T-levels, building on the strengths of the system while addressing the weaknesses. By breaking the two-year T-level into stackable units, students can build qualifications progressively and combine T-level modules with A-level subjects or other qualifications. 4.1.3 The modular approach would maintain the valuable industry placement component but make it more accessible through shorter, multiple placements rather than only single lengthy blocks, and funding for employer support to cover direct costs. 4.1.4 The government’s decision to retain funding for BTECs and other Applied General Qualifications alongside T-levels was welcome. Liberal Democrats continue to promote a mixed qualification ecosystem where students can combine different types of qualifications based on their career goals. 4.1.5 There is evidence for lower take-up of T-levels than other forms of Further Education among ethnic minority groups. We hope the more modular approach outlined above would help in improving diversity of take-up, but we would also require Skills England to work proactively to make all forms of skills training more accessible. 4.2 UTC Sleeve 4.2.1 A UTC sleeve is a mechanism that enables a University Technical College education to be available in mainstream 11-18 secondary schools. The sleeve allows a technical stream to be established enabling students who wish to follow a UTC technical curriculum the opportunity to do so, while the remaining students continue following EBacc and Progress 8. 4.2.2 The UTC Sleeve would have separate principals, teachers, classrooms – some of which would be converted into workshops, and a separate Governing Body led by representatives of local employers and a local university. 4.2.3 Taking a UTC education into secondary schools provides interested students with the qualifications, employability skills, and employer experiences that we know are valued at UTCs. It is possible to deliver the sleeve in the short-term and provides a clear role for existing UTCs to act as hubs of excellence. 4.2.4 A well-designed curriculum would be offered, through which students are enthused, engaged, and make good progress in their chosen technical field. Learning would be stretched and deepened through the contribution of employer partners and pupils would leave ‘work ready’, professional, and with well-developed employability skills. 4.2.5 Liberal Democrats support this initiative and would like to see it expanded quickly. 5 Mentoring and Careers Guidance 5.1 Mentoring 5.1.1 Voluntary Mentoring schemes can actively support a wide range of businesses from start-up to well-established. Such schemes both harness and provide additional motivation for experienced practitioners who choose to volunteer their time, enthusiasm, knowledge and understanding. Both concepts support the policy of through-life learning. 5.1.2 Mentoring programmes have several advantages. First, with the increasing pressure to help businesses and the economy grow within the context of less and less public funding, mobilising a highly skilled volunteer cohort makes a real difference. The Department of Business and Skills has evidence that suggests that using a business mentor can have a significant impact on business success, particularly among young businesses. Businesses that have worked with a mentor report 10% growth in employment in the previous 12 months, compared with 4% for businesses without a mentor. Similarly, 44% of those with a mentor report a growth in turnover, compared with 23% without a mentor. However, nationally usage of business mentors is still relatively low, with just 7% of all SMEs having used a mentor in the previous 12 months. 5.1.3 Liberal Democrats would establish voluntary mentoring schemes run at local council level, based on a model used in Dorset - where experienced business people are matched with new/growing businesses to share their expertise. Active encouragement should be given to enterprises and organisations with staff of more than 250 to follow best practice and appoint internal and/or retired personnel as mentors for skills and career development in their younger cohort, especially apprentices and sponsored graduates. Pump-priming funding should be provided for voluntary Mentoring schemes that complement the training and support offer of Local Authorities and Regional Growth Hubs. 5.1.4 The programme also provides one answer to the ‘third-age’ issue of how we continue to tap into the enormous reservoirs of skilled and experienced people who have left the workforce but who still have an enormous amount to offer. The programme also provides a continuing sense of purpose for mentors, as they continue to be useful, listened to and make an impact. 5.1.5 Within the UK economy SMEs account for 99% of all businesses and a business mentor can have a significant impact on a business’s ability to grow so volunteer business mentoring provision is a very cost-effective support mechanism using the skills of experienced business people to support growing businesses. However, while there is a significant market for this support, consistent funding has been an issue: with mentoring provision across the country tending to ebb and flow dependent upon government grant support or (in the past) European funding. As a consequence, many established organisations ceased operating when the funding ceased and all the latent talent and training of mentors were left to wither. 5.1.6 Where mentoring provision is free at the point of the use there has been evidence that the service was not necessarily valued by the recipients. A hybrid model for mentoring organisations with small amounts of public funding and an element of client funding helps shoulder costs and ensures the ‘buy-in’ of the businesses and the longer-term sustainability of the programme. This can deliver a very low-cost business mentoring scheme to help businesses exploit their full potential by tapping into support and guidance from people who have a proven track record in the business world. 5.2 Careers Guidance 5.2.1 Access to high quality careers education, information, advice and guidance (CEIAG) enables young people to understand all the possible careers open to them and the routes they can choose to take to reach their goals. CEIAG is of particular value for children from families which do not have a wide network of personal contacts within the world of work – for example children from lower socio-economic or ethnic minority backgrounds. 5.2.2 Despite its benefits, CEIAG is not a compulsory element of the curriculum in all schools and given that career-defining views develop when children are in primary school, we believe that beginning CEIAG provision in secondary school is too late. The Sutton Trust said in a recent report: “Embedding careers activities into the curriculum for those in primary and lower secondary school years is also important. These activities can influence future plans from a young age, and guidance from school is particularly important for socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils, who are less likely to be receiving advice and guidance, and have access to role models, outside of the classroom.” The DfE should work with the Gatsby Foundation to develop a tailored set of benchmarks for careers education in primary schools and provide guidance and resources through the Careers and Enterprise Company to support schools to meet them. Provision of high quality CEIAG is patchy across the country, proving a challenge for both young people and employers. It is of paramount importance that young people, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds who do not have access to networks, connections and familial advice to rely upon, have access to targeted, one-to-one careers advice and guidance at school or college. 5.2.3 We therefore propose to make CEIAG a part of the national curriculum, starting in the primary phase in an age-appropriate manner. 5.2.4 Employer engagement is critical to ensuring quality. More could be done to target CEIAG towards sectors of high and emerging skills needs in the economy as it transitions towards a green and ever more technologically advanced future. 5.2.5 Parents are obviously a hugely important part of most children's careers decisions, so engaging them in careers guidance is crucial. But a 2023 independent review found most schools don't make a conscious effort to engage parents with careers – even though those schools that did so saw parental engagement gradually improve. We propose developing guidance for schools on engaging parents in careers education, as part of our existing policy for a broader parental engagement strategy. 5.2.6 Further to classroom-based careers education, work experience enables young people to understand the workplace. The removal of the statutory duty on schools to ensure 14- to 16-year-olds undertook work experience at Key Stage 4 has had a severe impact on this. We would restore the duty. We recognise that safeguarding issues can be a barrier for some employers who would like to offer work experience, and would expect local authorities to offer support and guidance where this would be appropriate. We also believe the Sandwich course model in universities and colleges has much to commend it. 5.2.7 Financial literacy is an important skill to help young people access training opportunities and develop their career options. The 2024 Commons Education Select Committee report Delivering Effective Financial Education highlighted a number of problems with the current state of financial education. We would endorse its key recommendations, including making the economic and financial elements of PSHE education statutory at primary and secondary school level. 5.2.8 While the Gatsby Benchmarks have provided an effective framework for improving careers guidance for young people, adult career guidance remains fragmented and inadequate. The Gatsby Foundation estimates 11.1 million adults in England could benefit from careers guidance, but current provision is patchy. The National Careers Service provides limited face-to-face support, with online resources or telephone advice an inadequate substitute for personalised, professional guidance. 5.2.9 A Liberal Democrat government would significantly enhance National Careers Service provision with expanded face-to-face capacity. Cross departmental coordination mechanisms, bringing together the Department for Education, Department for Work and Pensions, and other relevant departments, would help deliver better support through regional careers guidance networks: connecting Jobcentres, educational institutions, training providers and employers. 5.2.10 We will strengthen the professional careers guidance workforce through collaboration with the Career Development Institute, supporting improved training, professional registration and pay structures. ________________ 6 Ensuring access to training and work for all 6.1 As Liberal Democrats, we want to address skills gaps and ensure opportunities to retrain and up-skill are available to all. Key aspects of the policy set out in this paper are already aimed to tackle inequality, including the duty of the reformed Skills England to ensure regular equality audits of skills policies and programmes, and the Lifelong Skills Grant. 6.2 There is a significant need for more and better training programmes for prisoners while in prison. Importantly, these should include training in using IT. Greater coordination is needed between prisons as to the courses they provide. Liberal Democrats have long called to improve the provision of training, education and work opportunities in prisons. To help ex-offenders build a life free from crime, we will strive to ensure that before release, that all prison-leavers have suitable accommodation, a bank account and employment or training, and are registered with a local GP. 6.3 Liberal Democrats are committed to speeding up the process to recognise asylum seekers and refugee’s existing qualifications where possible, so they can use their existing skills here in the UK. And we will lift the ban on asylum seekers working if they have been waiting for a decision for more than three months, enabling them to support themselves, integrate in their communities and contribute through taxation. 6.4 Children leaving care suffer particular disadvantages in acquiring skills and integrating into the workforce. We welcome the recent increase in the Care Leavers Bursary, but believe that more support in terms of mentoring and guidance should be given to children in care from age 13 to prepare them for the world of work. We would make care experience a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010 to strengthen the rights of people who are in or have been in care. 6.5 The education of young carers is often affected by the valuable work they do looking after relatives. We would give all young carers an ‘Education Guarantee’. This means that schools and other public service providers will have to meet young people’s needs in a way that doesn’t conflict with their role as carers. As part of this, young carers would be entitled to extra tuition if needed. We would expand the Pupil Premium to include extra funding for young carers, so that schools have the proper resources to deliver this. We would also introduce qualifications that can be accrued through caring, so universities and employers can better recognise young carers. 6.6 Young carers face other barriers to accessing education and training that limit their life chances. Current benefit rules prevent many from accessing the skills and qualifications they need, and young adult carers are three times as likely to be NEET compared to those without caring responsibilities. We will exempt young adult carers from the ‘21-hour rule’ that currently prevents them from claiming Carer’s Allowance if they study for more than 21 hours per week - no young person should be forced to choose between caring for their family and gaining qualifications. We will also work with apprenticeship providers and training institutions to provide support systems such as flexible scheduling. 6.7 Another group that is disadvantaged in seeking to improve their skills is parents. There is very limited childcare funding to help working-age parents studying for qualifications at Level 3 or below, and what is available via Learner Support is allocated on a discretionary basis. In contrast, eligible students in Higher Education can access guaranteed support via a Childcare Grant (CG). Also, working parents can access 15 hours of free childcare (on top of the universal 15 hours) for their 3-4-year-olds, while those studying full-time cannot. To tackle these barriers to learning we would: * Extending the CG currently available to low-income HE students to all full-time students undertaking eligible courses regardless of level. * Treat parents on full-time courses much like working parents, and offer them an additional 15 hours free childcare for 3-4-year-olds for 38 weeks of the year. 6.8 To support access to skills for disabled people, we will ringfence part of the Adult Education Budget for training opportunities for adults with disabilities, as an invest-to-save measure that can help those adults into the workforce, while also building confidence. ________________ Opportunity for All Policy Paper 159 This paper has been approved for debate by the Federal Conference by the Federal Policy Committee under the terms of Article 7.4 of the Federal Constitution. Within the policy-making procedure of the Liberal Democrats, the Federal Party determines the policy of the Party in those areas which might reasonably be expected to fall within the remit of the federal institutions in the context of a federal United Kingdom. The Party in England, the Scottish Liberal Democrats, the Welsh Liberal Democrats and the Northern Ireland Local Party determine the policy of the Party on all other issues, except that any or all of them may confer this power upon the Federal Party in any specified area or areas. The Party in England has chosen to pass up policy-making to the Federal level. If approved by Conference, this paper will therefore form the policy of the Federal Party on federal issues and the Party in England on English issues. In appropriate policy areas, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland party policy would take precedence. ________________ Opportunity and Skills Working Group The members of the working group who have prepared this paper are listed below. Rosie Shimell (Chair) Cllr Janet Baah Vivien Biggs Cllr Michael Chapman Martin Eggleston Cllr Colin Ferguson Cllr Stephen Gauntlett Kirsten Herbst-Gray Sal Jarvis Penny Larson Kevin Langford Ted Logan Jay Mercer Linda Norton Mark Platt Callum Robertson Theodore Roos Ian Sollom MP Jon Thompson Note: Membership of the working group should not be taken to indicate that every member necessarily agrees with every statement or every proposal in this paper. Staff: Christian Moon Cathal Byrne Further copies of this paper can be found online at: https://www.libdems.org.uk/members/make-policy/#policy-papers Autumn Conference 2025