Issue - meetings

To receive a report by the Cabinet Member for Economic Development and the Corporate Director of Growth, Environment and Transport about the new apprenticeship levy

(1)       Mr Davison, Region Director – The Manufacturers’ Organisation provided information to the Cabinet Committee about the impact of the levy on employers represented by the Manufacturers’ Organisation.

(2)       He considered that the levy was in effect a tax of 0.5% on the paybill, and that the digital voucher scheme was complex and difficult to administer. He said not all companies recruited the same number of apprentices each year and it was not clear for how long the voucher would be valid.   A presentation providing more information about the Manufacturers’ Organisation’s views is available on-line as an appendix to these minutes. 

(3)       Allan Baillie (Skills and Employability Manager) introduced the report presented to the Cabinet Committee which summarised how the apprenticeship levy would work and the likely impact on KCC and other employers in Kent.  He said KCC had a role in increasing access to apprenticeships in both the public and private sectors and could use its procurement and commissioning process to require contractors to employ apprentices.  In addition a new apprenticeship recruitment website to help both employers and apprentices had been developed.  He also said there might be opportunities for the authority to generate income and support employment programmes by selling training programmes outside the county and by providing the assessments required as part of the new apprenticeship standards.  Mr Baillie said KCC would pay the levy and, therefore, would be able to draw down from the fund. Up to 10% of this could be allocated within its supply chain, for example to support the transition from Level 2 to Level 3 apprenticeships in care homes.

(4)       In response to questions, Mr Davison said that an apprenticeship had to last a minimum of one year and one day but could last longer and could be used to re-train people within an organisation.  He also said that: manufacturing organisations were four times more productive than they had been as a result of investing in people; the drive to increase apprenticeships was well supported but the process to unlock funding was very complex; companies would re-shape their recruitment to maximise the draw down from the fund; and it was likely there would be more apprenticeships aimed at graduates.

(5)       The Committee supported the drive to increase the number of apprenticeships and while some Members welcomed the Apprenticeship Levy, others thought it was overly complex and bureaucratic.

(6)       Resolved that:

(a)       The report be noted

(b)       The proposed establishment of a Member and officer working group to support KCC’s approach to increasing the take-up and quality of apprenticeships be noted;

(c)        A working group comprising one officer, one Member and representatives from the business community be established to represent the views of young people and employers on the proposed levy and to lobby government to simplify it.