My Lords, I beg to move Amendment 3 and in doing so I declare my interest as co-chair of Peers for the Planet. I also apologise for not being able to be present at the Second Reading of the Bill—but I am delighted that many of the issues with which this group of amendments deal were raised by other noble Lords who will be speaking later today.
In introducing this group of amendments, I will speak to Amendments 3, 9 and 25, which I have tabled. I am very grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Morgan of Cotes, who is sadly unavoidably unable to participate this afternoon, the noble Baroness, Lady Sheehan, and the noble Lord, Lord Knight of Weymouth, for adding their names to this amendment. I also support and will speak briefly to other amendments in this group.
Unlike many who are participating in today’s debate, I am no expert in the field of skills and post-16 education—although I have to say that I think the last two and a half hours have given me a little bit of a crash course in some of the issues that will be more familiar to others here. But one does not have to be an expert to understand that the economy of the future—the shift to a green and sustainable industrial model—will require an innovative redesign of the UK’s education and skills framework, both to equip young workers for those jobs and to support a just transition for workers in carbon-intensive industries that will simply not exist in the future.
This was clearly articulated in a report published yesterday by the think tank Onward, Qualifying for the Race to Net Zero, which highlights how unprepared Britain’s labour market is for the challenges and opportunities of net zero. It says:
“This is a challenge of paramount importance. Without the labour supply or the skills base to develop net technologies or deliver the decarbonisation of existing industry or housing stock”
net zero is simply “not deliverable”. The Government’s overarching ambitions regarding climate change and our obligations under the Paris Agreement are threatened by a lack of skills in this area.
5 pm
As part of that, an estimated 3.2 million workers in the UK will need to increase their skill level or retrain in a new qualification if we are to meet that target, and if they are to get the jobs that will be available, so it is really important that we address this issue. Some sectors are more heavily affected than others. Almost one in three workers in construction will need upskilling, along with more than one in four in transport and storage. I find it extraordinary that the Bill, which could and should form the basis of a cross-cutting, long-term skills and education strategy to support the Government’s commitment to net zero, contains not a single mention of the relevance of climate and nature considerations.
I understand the debate that we have just had about the importance of place and locality—of not having a one-size-fits-all system or having everything directed
from the centre. However, it is an indisputable fact that the needs of the education sector, of young people and of those workers in industries that are not going to remain the same cannot be put to one side. We cannot have climate change-free zones in any area of life. This is affecting everybody. In this area, it is absolutely essential to have the right skills and education to meet the national commitments. However, local plans that do not take into account the fact that these monumental changes are going on in employment, business and industry will fail those in their local communities.
The amendments that I have put forward and that others are raising in this group are aimed at bringing to the debate, and to the set-up envisaged in the Bill, the introduction of net-zero and biodiversity considerations at every level. My three amendments are strategically aligned. They are linked and are all aimed at introducing a net-zero and nature test into decisions that the Secretary of State makes at various stages in relation to local skills improvement plans. Amendment 3 would ensure that, when considering whether education or training is material to a specified area and to the skills, capabilities or expertise that are or may be required by employers in the future, one of the circumstances to which the Secretary of State must have regard is whether those future skills align with the UK’s net-zero target.
It is essential when considering jobs and skills of the future that there is oversight and co-ordination of the education and training needed for green jobs, so that the right investment decisions and forward planning can be put in place to ensure that the right skills are there at the right time to meet the needs. Without this strategic overview and a link-up to national strategic priorities such as achieving our net-zero targets, which the Secretary of State can provide, there is a real risk that local skills improvement plans could identify education and training without considering the necessary alignment with national targets and, as I say, without therefore meeting the real needs of their communities.
Amendment 9 would add a net-zero and environmental “have regard” test to the matters which the Secretary of State considers when deciding whether to approve and publish local skills improvement plans. Currently, the Bill is silent as to what matters the Secretary of State might have regard to. I understand what the Minister said about this being a framework Bill, however it specifies only that
“The relevant provider must have regard to … guidance published by the Secretary of State”
without setting out what such guidance will cover. This amendment provides that
“the Secretary of State must have regard to”
the extent to which a local skills improvement plan
“contributes to the achievement of … the net zero target”
by 2050 and to the UK’s environmental goals. I quite understand why the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, has tabled an amendment to my amendment to make sure we do not disregard nature and the environment, and focus only on net zero.
The Campaign for Learning concluded, in presenting its recent report Racing to Net Zero - the Role of Post-16 Education and Skills:
“Post-16 education and skills will be central to achieving climate change targets and moving to a Net Zero economy and society here in the UK.”
Business groups have also highlighted the important role that the UK’s skills strategy can play in putting the UK on track to achieve its targets. The Aldersgate Group’s CEO commented, on the publication of its report Upskilling the UK Workforce for the 21st Century, that employers and businesses recognise the importance of a joined-up future skills strategy to help the shift to a net-zero economy. Including a net-zero test within the matters that the Secretary of State must have regard to will send a signal to relevant providers—who must have regard to any guidance published by the Secretary of State—to consider how future education and skills which are material to local skills improvement plans align with the net-zero transition.
Amendment 25 is my final “net-zero test” amendment, following the advice of the Climate Change Committee that all government policies and legislation should contain within them a net-zero test. It seeks to further embed consideration of our net-zero and biodiversity targets into decision-making by providing that
“When approving and publishing a local skills improvement plan … the Secretary of State must report on how such a plan has taken account of any national skills strategy, and consider to what extent”
the plan aligns with net-zero and biodiversity targets.
My amendments are all about ensuring that consideration of those targets is embedded in legislation and that local skills improvement plans join the dots with the national strategy in this area. By making sure policies and strategies align across government and the different decision-making processes, we should be able to see real progress towards achieving net zero and addressing the nature crisis, and towards providing sustainable jobs and opportunities for the future for young people, and those who are having to make changes and learn new skills in mid-career.
I am also very supportive of the other amendments in this group: Amendments 34, 42, 73 and 75 in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Sheehan; Amendments 52, 60 and 61 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Knight; Amendment 7 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Oates; and Amendments 4 and 10, in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, of Manor Castle. I will listen to what they have to say about those amendments and, of course, to the Minister’s response with great interest.
Amendment 4 (to Amendment 3)