The coalition must rethink its approach to youth unemployment

Ministers must accept that the immigration cap will not help young Britons into work.

Today's rise in the number of young people not in employment, education or training is the biggest since records began in 2000. Compared with the same period last year, there are now 119,000 more 19-24 year olds not in education, work or training, representing a rise of 18 per cent. These figures follow new research published yesterday by the Chartered Institute for Personnel Development showing that while youth unemployment rises, employer demand for migrant workers continues to rise.

Both sets of figures should cause the government to rethink its approach. Tomorrow's migration statistics will confirm whether the trends are pushing the net migration target further out of reach: the previous quarter's figures showed emigration of British nationals down by more than 25 per cent since 2008, and immigration from Eastern Europe rising, both trends which the government can do little about. Last week, the Spectator magazine was one of the first to take the questionable argument that used to be levelled at Labour, that 'too many new jobs are going to foreigners', and turn it against the government. Yesterday's CIPD survey suggests that this pressure is likely to worsen, as employer demand for migrant workers continues to rise, particularly in the private sector, with 32 per cent now saying they are planning to recruit migrant workers in the next quarter:

A

Source: CPID, August 2011

This national picture disguises significant regional variation. Employers in London (40 per cent) and the South (30 per cent) are significantly more likely to say they intend to recruit migrant workers than those in the North (14 per cent). There is also anecdotal evidence that the Government has underestimated the disruptive effect on employers of its 'cap' on non-EU migrant workers. In talking to business and other pro-migration audiences, ministers cite the fact that the interim quotas for 2010 were not fully taken up, to suggest that the cap has not been too restrictive. But at a recent meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group on migration, employers and business associations confirmed that unused quotas reflected pre-emptive decisions by companies not bothering to go through the laborious process of applying, in the expectation that they would be disappointed. This new survey gives more detail on how these employers are reacting to the cap by switching to other kinds of migrant workers: more employers say they plan to hire EU migrant workers (34 per cent), than up-skill existing workers (23 per cent), or recruit more graduates. Eight per cent say they intend to offshore jobs abroad.

Why do so many employers still prefer to hire migrant workers? The CIPD survey casts doubt on the idea - a major theme in the reaction to Iain Duncan Smith's recent demand for employers to give priority to British workers - that it is all about 'soft skills'. The survey finds far more employers citing hard skills or specific experience - and interestingly, only 16 per cent saying they prefer migrants because they are cheaper:

Why do you prefer migrant workers? CPID, August 2011

A

The overall picture is one of employers struggling to fill skills gaps despite rising levels of unemployment - suggesting that a renewed focus on training and skills would be more useful than attempting further restrictions on skilled non-EU immigration.

With today's NEET figures, last week's ONS labour market figures showing youth unemployment rising above 20 per cent, and the cuts in public sector employment starting to bite, the fall in the proportion of private sector employers planning to hire school-leavers must also be particularly worrying - though there is some encouraging news in rising awareness of apprenticeships.

In relation to immigration policy, the risk remains that a combination of trends beyond the government's control - British emigration, immigration from the EU, and employer preferences - will lead the government to adopt even more drastic measures on those limited areas of immigration it can control, like skilled workers from outside the EU, students, or settlement policy, simply because that is the only way to affect net migration numbers, even though the specific measures are likely to further hamper growth.

It is not too late for the government to break out of this dynamic, redouble its efforts on apprenticeships, and start the long term task of improving vocational education and training, accepting that the cap and net migration target will not solve the crisis in youth unemployment, and will only slow our economic recovery.

Matt Cavanagh is Associate Director at IPPR

Follow him on Twitter @matt_cav_

Getty
Show Hide image

Donald Trump vs Barack Obama: How the inauguration speeches compared

We compared the two presidents on trade, foreign affairs and climate change – so you (really, really) don't have to.

After watching Donald Trump's inaugural address, what better way to get rid of the last few dregs of hope than by comparing what he said with Barack Obama's address from 2009? 

Both thanked the previous President, with Trump calling the Obamas "magnificent", and pledged to reform Washington, but the comparison ended there. 

Here is what each of them said: 

On American jobs

Obama:

The state of our economy calls for action, bold and swift.  And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.  We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.  We'll restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost.  We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.  And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.

Trump:

For many decades we've enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry, subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military.

One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores with not even a thought about the millions and millions of American workers that were left behind.

Obama had a plan for growth. Trump just blames the rest of the world...

On global warming

Obama:

With old friends and former foes, we'll work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet.

Trump:

On the Middle East:

Obama:

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West, know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. 

Trump:

We will re-enforce old alliances and form new ones and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the earth.

On “greatness”

Obama:

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned.

Trump:

America will start winning again, winning like never before.

 

On trade

Obama:

This is the journey we continue today.  We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth.  Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began.  Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week, or last month, or last year.  Our capacity remains undiminished.  

Trump:

We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our product, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs.

Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength. I will fight for you with every breath in my body, and I will never ever let you down.

Stephanie Boland is digital assistant at the New Statesman. She tweets at @stephanieboland