Debate contribution: Apprenticeships

Debate contribution by Ms Sorcha Eastwood on .

MLA
Ms Sorcha Eastwood
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
5 March 2024
Type
Debate contribution
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
Apprenticeships
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4252873

Text

I really welcome today's motion. I echo the comments of the Chair of the Economy Committee; somebody whom I have really enjoyed working with in the past few weeks. I know that we are on the same page when it comes to social inclusion in terms of skills and education. Our amendment is a friendly one. It is intended to support the motion, build on it and reiterate the important elements of apprenticeship policy that I will touch on. I strongly believe that apprenticeships are a transformational educational route for people of all ages; indeed, education and skills provide people with a passport for the rest of their life. Apprenticeships can help our society to fill skill gaps and provide accessible routes into excellent careers such as manufacturing, healthcare, technology, business, hospitality and trades. When was the last time you tried to get a tradesperson? They are like hen's teeth. They can call their price, and fair play to them. Apprenticeships can also ensure that people emerge from education with hugely valuable skills and without the level of debt that can be experienced through other paths. In 2021-22, we had 7,608 apprenticeship starts from level 2 through to level 7. Across the board, we have seen the trend of people undertaking apprenticeships increasing, but slowly. Our apprenticeship participation rate per 1,000 remains the lowest in the UK, while the latest employer skills survey showed that there were nearly 40,000 vacancies in the North, nearly 14,000 of which were deemed skills-shortage vacancies. A lot more work can be done around apprenticeships, although that has been made significantly harder with us having lost crucial EU funding following our exit from the EU and the difficult financial position of our Departments.

Progress needs to be made, and I will touch on a number of areas. The first is the tone with which we discuss apprenticeships and vocational training in society. There remains a perception among many that the academic route is somehow inherently better. I have nothing against universities — I even went to one, later in life — or people who choose the academic route. However, we need to make it clear that university is not inherently better or worse than vocational pathways; there should be absolute parity between the two. That lingering perception does not exist to the same extent in the likes of Switzerland or Germany, because they simply look at the facts. Technical and vocational pathways such as apprenticeships produce highly skilled and sought-after individuals who are desperately needed in our society. In fact, without those people, our daily life would grind to a halt.

The lingering societal bias is changing, but we need to speed up that change. That is, in part, why I am so passionate about reforming careers advice — something that the Chair of the Economy Committee already mentioned — especially in schools. Young people need to be aware of every opportunity and path that is available to them, including apprenticeships, and they need to be empowered and supported to follow the route that they want to follow. That means delivering the long-delayed careers portal, having earlier interventions, making it easier for young people to experience the world of work at first hand and ensuring that that happens more than once throughout their school career. It also means having ongoing conversations about the routes that young people can take — I think of excellent organisations, such as Young Enterprise, that do brilliant work on that across Northern Ireland. The motion speaks of increasing the apprenticeship offer, and I agree with that. For example, the development of a nursing higher level apprenticeship framework is welcome news. As the Committee Chair touched on, there is definitely potential for other frameworks to be developed, particularly in social care. We mentioned the climate challenge and the potential for green growth. Indeed, just last week, the Economy Committee heard about the transformational opportunities of moving towards net zero. There are not just opportunities to reduce fuel poverty, but opportunities for local businesses and technologies to develop and thrive. Those growing and future sectors need a strong pipeline of emerging talent. Northern Ireland Electricity Networks and other companies have clubbed together to form a utilities apprenticeship, which will be absolutely key for us.

Absolutely. I agree with the Member: I am thinking of her constituency of Mid Ulster and of the incredible work that Manufacturing and Engineering Growth and Advancement (MEGA) does to bring young people to the workplace. As the Member said, it is crucial that this is led by industry, which has the innate ability to understand where our economy is going and can give our young people the chance to progress through that. Developing the sorts of frameworks and sectoral partnerships that we have talked about does not, alone, equal success. England has had apprenticeships in nursing since September 2017, and, although the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) says that there is a place for them, it has noticed, in the course of their execution, a shortage of training capacity, a lack of funding, and constraints caused by the apprenticeship levy. Healthcare apprenticeships need to be part of a strategic workforce plan, and that requires close cross-departmental working. In my short time here, I have already raised issues around the health workforce challenge with the Health Minister and the Economy Minister on the Floor of the House. We know that that will not be down to one Department; it will be a cross-departmental job of work. There needs to be acceptance that Northern Ireland is made up of SMEs; we are predominantly an SME economy. We need to ensure that SMEs, like bigger organisations, are empowered and supported to take on apprentices. That requires supporting them through advice and training, but it also means further developing our managerial capacity. Again and again, we hear about the need for interventions to develop more managerial talent across all sectors. That needs to be carried out as part of a twin-track approach with apprenticeship development, as good managers will ensure that apprentices are motivated and get the most out of the training. Our amendment makes specific reference to the role of further education. That is incredibly important at this time. I echo the sentiments of the Committee Chair. I feel that it was important to put that on record, as I feel, particularly at this time, that our colleges, and the lecturers and students within them, need champions right now. The FE sector was, rightly, at the heart of the skills strategy. The reality, however, comprises ongoing industrial relations issues, lack of pay parity with schoolteachers, a voluntary redundancy scheme costing millions, and the potential of campus closures, all while we have been told that a project is under way to consider the future structure of the FE system. That transformation project needs to be brought forward urgently and discussed openly before the voluntary redundancy scheme goes ahead and before any decisions on campus closures are taken. Otherwise, we are simply jumping the shark.

I will, surely.

Absolutely. I thank the Member for his point. I share that concern, not just on the specific campus that but on what he raised in general. We are right to pause in that regard. We need a strategic vision for FE, and we need to provide clear delineation of the role and functions of universities, colleges and schools. The recommendations included in the independent review of education should be considered. Our amendment refers to a dedicated skills fund. That was a recommendation of the OECD skills strategy for Northern Ireland and is a request of many businesses. It will be essential to making real progress on developing apprenticeships and supporting more people to start them. Establishing it would also send a signal that the Department is making lifelong learning and skills a priority. In this country, we tend to think that learning stops at 16, 18 or 21. That mindset needs to change. I know that the Minister shares that view of the world and has made strides to frame that conversation. Instead of benefiting from a dedicated skills fund, our larger businesses currently have to pay an apprenticeship levy to the UK Treasury of circa £80 million without seeing any direct benefit. Although it is a reserved matter, we need to continue to make the case that it does not work for our local organisations. We want to see a growing number of apprenticeship frameworks and opportunities, as long as they are well designed, well considered and properly supported. We want the number of people starting and, most importantly, completing apprenticeships to increase. We believe that ambitious targets should be set around both. As they say, what gets measured gets done. We also want to see changing demographics, with more women undertaking apprenticeships, more people from disadvantaged backgrounds moving up through them, and all-age apprenticeships. We therefore support the amendment and commend the motion to the House.

1,494 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not qualifying”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.95).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-qualifying threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.95Yes
Overall judgement0.02At or below not-qualifying threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.57
Education structures, integration and community division0.19
No identity-related subject0.17
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.04
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.02

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 09:50 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification